U.S. Department of Transportation
Federal Highway Administration
1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE
Washington, DC 20590
202-366-4000
U.S. Department of Transportation
Federal Highway Administration
1200 New Jersey Ave. S.E.
Washington, D.C. 20590
February 11, 2014
In Reply Refer To:
HSST/WZ-327
Mr. Henry A. Ross
Director of Government Relations
Plasticade
7700 N. Austin Avenue
Skokie, Illinois 60077
Dear Mr. Ross:
This letter is in response to your request for the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) to review roadside safety systems for eligibility for reimbursement under the Federal-aid highway program.
Name of system: | Type III Barricade using Power Post™ plastic uprights |
---|---|
Type of system: | Type III Barricade |
Test Level: | MASH Test Level III |
Testing conducted by: | E-TECH Testing Services |
Date of request: | June 21, 2013 |
Complete package | December 14, 2013 |
Decision:
The following device is eligible, with details provided in the form which is attached as an integral part of this letter:
Based on a review of crash test results submitted by the manufacturer certifying the device described herein meets the crash test and evaluation criteria of the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials' Manual for Assessing Safety Hardware (MASH), the device is eligible for reimbursement under the Federal-aid highway program. Eligibility for reimbursement under the Federal-aid highway program does not establish approval or endorsement by the FHWA for any particular purpose or use.
The FHWA, the Department of Transportation, and the United States Government do not endorse products or services and the issuance of a reimbursement eligibility letter is not an endorsement of any product or service.
Requirements
To be found eligible for Federal-aid funding, roadside safety devices should meet the crash test and evaluation criteria contained in the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials' Manual for Assessing Safety Hardware (MASH).
Description
The device and supporting documentation are described in the attached form, including your request for waiver of MASH Tests 3-70 and 3-72.
Summary and Standard Provisions
Therefore, the system described and detailed in the attached form is eligible for reimbursement and may be installed under the range of conditions tested.
Please note the following standard provisions that apply to FHWA eligibility letters:
Sincerely yours, /* Signature of Michael S. Griffith*/ Michael S. Griffith |
Enclosures
Submitter | Date of Request: | 6/21/2013 | New Resubmission |
Name: | Henry A. Ross | Signature: | |
Company: | Plasticade | ||
Address: | 7700 N. Austin Avenue, Skokie, IL 60077 | ||
Country: | USA | ||
To: | Michael S. Griffith, Director FHWA, Office of Safety Technologies |
I request the following devices be considered eligible for reimbursement under the Federal-aid
highway program.
System Type | Submission Type | Device Name/Variant | Testing Criterion | Test Level |
---|---|---|---|---|
'WZ': Crash Worthy Work Zone Traffic Control Devices | Physical Crash Testing FEA & V&V Analysis |
Plasticade Power Post Type III Barricade |
AASHTO MASH | TL3 |
By submitting this request for review and evaluation by the Federal Highway Administration, I certify that the product(s) was (were) tested in conformity with the AASHTO Manual for Assessing Safety Hardware and that the evaluation results meet the appropriate evaluation criteria in the MASH.
Identification of the individual or organization responsible for the product:
Contact Name: | Henry A. Ross | Same as Submitter ☒ |
Company Name: | Plasticade | Same as Submitter ☒ |
Address: | 7700 N. Austin Avenue, Skokie, IL 60077 | Same as Submitter ☒ |
Country: | USA | Same as Submitter ☒ |
New Hardware |
---|
Type III barricade utilizing plastic uprights and panels, angle iron feet. and lightweight warning lights |
A brief description of each crash test and its result:
Required Test Number | Narrative Description | Evaluation Results |
---|---|---|
3-70 (1100C) | WAIVER REQUESTED | |
3-71 (1100C) | impacted at 0 degrees and 90 degrees at 63 km/h per MASH | PASS |
3-72 (2270P) | WAIVER REQUESTED |
Full Scale Crash Testing was done in compliance with MASH by the following accredited crash test laboratory (cite the laboratory's accreditation status as noted in the crash test reports.):
Laboratory Name: | E Tech Testing Services, Inc. | |
Laboratory Contact: | John F. La Turner. P.E. | Same as Submitter ☐ |
Address: | 1361 7B Cincinnati Avenue. Rocklin, CA 95765 | Same as Submitter ☐ |
Country: | USA | Same as Submitter ☐ |
Accreditation Certificate Number and Date: |
Attach to this form:
1) A copy of the full test report, video, and a Test Data Summary Sheet for each test conducted in support of this request.
2) A drawing or drawings of the device(s) that conform to the Task Force-13 Drawing Specifications [Hardware Guide Drawing Standards]. For proprietary products, a single isometric line drawing is usually acceptable to illustrate the product, with detailed specifications, intended use, and contact information provided on th e reverse. Additional drawings (not in TF-13 format) showing details that are key to understanding the performance of the device should also be submitted to facilitate our review.
FHWA Official Business Only:
Eligibility Letter | AASHTO TF13 | Key Words | |
---|---|---|---|
Number | Date | Designator | |
December 13, 2013
Nicholas A. Artimovich, II
Highway Engineer, Safety Design Team
Office of Safety Technologies, Rm E71-322
Federal Highway Administration
U.S. Department of Transportation
1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE
Washington, DC 20590
RE: Draft WZ-327
Mr. Artimovich,
We recently completed testing of the Plasticade® Power Post™ Type III Barricade using the recommendations in AASHTO's Manual for Assessing Safety Hardware (MASH). As recommended in MASH, work zone traffic control devices are tested to determine the behavior of the devices during and after impact with both small 1100C (2425 lb/ll00kg) and heavy 2270P (5004 lb/2270 kg) vehicles. The risk to occupants from detached elements, fragments, or other debris is assessed, as well as vehicle instability. A key potential risk factor is windshield deformation or penetration.
Test 70 is designed to gauge the ability of the 1100C vehicle to activate any breakaway or yielding feature of the device. For freestanding devices that weigh less than 220 lb (100 kg) this test is considered optional. The Plasticade® Power Post™ Type III Barricade, including lightweight warning lights and ballast, weighs a total of 183 lb (83.1 kg). Test 70 was not performed.
Test 71 is designed to evaluate the behavior of the devices during high speed tests, using the 1100C vehicle. This test is recognized as the more critical test by FHWA and, depending on results and device/vehicle geometry. It may be unnecessary to perform the 2270P test. If there is no evidence of
vehicle instability or windshield penetration in Test 71, or any belief that these would occur to a pickup
truck in a Test 72 situation, a waiver may be requested so that the Test 72 need not be performed. Test 71 was performed with the Power Post Type III Barricade with the understanding that Test 72 could be
waived with appropriate results. This test showed satisfactory results with no vehicle instability or windshield penetration. Based on the 1100C results and the following analysis of both vehicles' geometry, we request a waiver for Test 72. Here is a summary of the 1100C and 2270P vehicle
geometries:
The height of the vehicle hood relative to the height of the test device is critical to determining the potential for the device to contact the windshield. The Power Post Type III Barricade has a total height to the top of the top board of 63.0 inches. The 1100C vehicle used for the high speed small vehicle test had a height from the ground to the forward edge of the hood of 28.0 inches (Measurement J). The measurement from the front edge of the hood to the base of the windshield is 32.0 inches. The relationship of the height of the device to the front of the small vehicle is shown here.
The corresponding ground to edge of hood measurement (Measurement J) for the 2270P vehicle in a Test 72 scenario is 41.3 inches. In this scenario, the hood edge would be 13.3 inches higher than the 1100C vehicle. In addition, the measurement from the front edge of the hood to the base of the windshield is 47 .0 inches. The relationship of the height of the device to the front of the Test 72 pickup truck is shown here
In the 1100C test, the end of the barricade made contact with the windshield and cracked it, without penetrating it. Based on the higher truck profile including a more than 13 inch higher hood edge to the ground measurement and a windshield to hood edge measurement that is 15 inches greater, we believe that it is unlikely that the test article would make significant contact with the windshield before getting up to near the same forward speed as the vehicle . We believe that Test 71 was, in fact, the worst case test and it is unlikely that the performance of Test 72 would result in a different outcome.
We request a waiver on Test 72 and issuance of WZ-327.
Thank you
/s/ Henry A. Ross
Sincerely,
PLASTICADE
Henry A. Ross, Director of Government Relations
June 21, 2013
Mr. Michael S. Griffith, Director
Office of Safety Technologies
Federal Highway Administration
1200 New Jersey Avenue, S.E.
Washington, DC 20590
Dear Sir:
Enclosed is our request for federal-aid reimbursement eligibility for the Plasticade e Power Post Type III Barricade. This device was successfully crash tested by E-TECH Testing Services, Inc. on April 23, 2013. A copy of the test report and a DVD with various videos and pictures of the device and the testing process are also enclosed.
The barricade tested had a panel width of 144 inches. We request that our WZ letter of eligibility specifically allow other barricade panel widths of 60 inches, 72 inches, 96 inches, and 120 inches, as well. Our request is based on a belief that the 144 inch width represented a "worst case" for testing purposes (see test report page 6, Section II A). This is consistent with a previous similar test that resulted in WZ-299 being issued to us on March 10, 2011.
The barricade was tested with angle iron feet, ballasted with sandbags. We request that similar feet fabricated from perforated square steel tubing (PSST), also ballasted with sandbags, be deemed eligible, as well.
Please let me know if any additional information is required.
Sincerely.
PLASTICADE
/s/ Henry A. Ross
Henry A. Ross
Director, Government Relations
7700 N. Austin Ave., Skokie, IL 60077 www.plasticade.com (800) 772-0355 Fax (847) 966-8074