Index Appurtenances: Michigan Design Manual Road Design

MICHIGAN DESIGN MANUAL
ROAD DESIGN
CHAPTER 7
INDEX
APPURTENANCES
7.01
ROADSIDE SAFETY BARRIER
7.01.01
References
7.01.02
Application of Section 7.01
7.01.03
History of Guardrail and Barrier in Michigan
7.01.04
Section Deleted
7.01.05
Basic Concepts for Roadside Control
7.01.06
Guardrail Worksheet
7.01.10
Clear Zone - History
7.01.11
Current Clear Zone Criteria

A. Treatment/Considerations of Obstacles Outside the
Calculated Project Clear Zone
B. Treatment/Considerations of Obstacles Inside the
Calculated Project Clear Zone
C. Clear Zone Distance Chart
D. Curve Correction Factors Table
E. Other Controlling Factors
7.01.12
Types of Guardrail Used in Michigan
7.01.13
Curved Beam Elements
7.01.14
Guardrail Surface Finish

A. Galvanized
B. Unpainted Corrosion Resistant
C. Corrosion-Resistant Guardrail Replacement Policy
7.01.15
Guardrail Terminals
7.01.16
Guardrail Attachment to Bridges and Walls
7.01.17
Strength Requirements of Steel Beam Guardrail
7.01.18
Suggested Shy Line Offset Values

ROAD DESIGN
CHAPTER 7 APPURTENANCES INDEX (continued)
7.01.19
Suggested Runout Lengths for Barrier Design
7.01.20
Guardrail Deflection
7.01.21
Guardrail Strength Transitions
7.01.22
Minimum Guardrail Lengths and Gaps
7.01.23
Function of Guardrail Components
7.01.24
Accommodation of Expansion
7.01.25
Guardrail Approach Terminals

A. Type 1 Terminals
B. Type 2 Terminals
C. Function of the Various Guardrail Terminal Components
D. Guardrail Full Strength Point
E. Clear Area Behind Guardrail Terminals
F. Burying Ending in a Backslope
G. Slope Under Guardrail Terminals
7.01.29
Guardrail Flare
A. Flare Rate
B. Uniform Flare from Structures
7.01.30
Guardrail at Embankments
A. Height-Slope Guidelines
B. Location on Fill Sections (New Construction)
C. Maximum Height of 1:2 Slope Without Barrier
D. Flattening Slopes to Eliminate Guardrail
E. Length of Barrier at Embankments (New Construction)
F. Length of Barrier at Embankments (Upgrading Projects)
G. Placing Beam Guardrail on a Downslope
H. Guardrail Placed near Intersecting Streets and Driveways
7.01.31
Shielding Bodies of Water
7.01.32
Barrier at Bridge Approaches (Over and Under)

A. Attachment to Barriers and Closer Post Spacing
B. Relationship Between Bridge Sidewalk and Approach Guardrail
C. Barrier at the Trailing End of Overpassing Structures
D. Shielding Requirements at Bridge Underpasses
E. Guardrail Bullnose
F. Bridge Columns and Foundations in 70' Medians
7.01.33
Maintaining Guardrail Strength When One or More Posts Must be Omitted

A. Downspout Headers
B. Wide Culverts
C. Placing Guardrail in Rock
D. Guardrail Posts through Paved Surfaces
E. Additional Blockouts on Guardrail Posts

ROAD DESIGN
7.01.34
Guardrail in Conjunction with Curb
7.01.40
Guardrail Posts for Roadside Control
7.01.41
Upgrading and Replacement of Guardrail

A. Guidelines for Upgrading or Replacing Guardrail
B. Upgrading Guardrail Terminals
C. Intermixing Wood and Steel Posts
D. 8'-0" Posts
E. Allowable Variation from Standard Height
F. Unpainted Corrosion Resistant Beam Elements
G. Thick Shoulder Lifts
H. Type A Guardrail Parallel to Continuous Abutment,
Twin Overpassing Structures
I. Replacing with Thrie Beam Guardrail
7.01.43
Guidelines for Bridge Railing Replacement and

Attached Approach and Trailing Guardrails
7.01.44
Guardrail Upgrading on Local Roads

A. Guardrail Upgrading Guidelines on Local Roads
(In Conjunction with Freeway Work)
B. Cul-de-sacs
C. Guardrail at Urban Service Road T
D. Cable on Chain Link Fence
7.01.45
Alternative Barrier End Treatments

A. X-Tension / X-MAS
B. X-TENuator
C. QuadTrend
D. BEAT-SSCC
7.01.50
Temporary Beam Guardrail
7.01.54
Warrants for Median Barriers for Freeways
7.01.55
Median Barriers Types

A. Concrete Median Barrier
B. Double Steel Beam Guardrail
C. Cable Barrier
7.01.56
Concrete Median Barrier

A. GM Shape
B. New Jersey Shape
C. Innovative Concrete Median Barriers
7.01.57
Ending Concrete Barrier
7.01.58
Two Types of Concrete Median Barrier Footings

ROAD DESIGN
7.01.59
Concrete Glare Screen
7.01.60
Retrofitting Concrete Median Barrier
7.01.65
Concrete Median Barrier Between Roadways of Different Elevations
7.01.66
Concrete Barrier, Single Face
7.01.67
Temporary Barrier
7.01.68
Ending Temporary Barrier
7.01.69
Temporary Barrier at Bridge Deck and Railing Reconstruction
7.01.70
Temporary Barrier Adjacent to a Precipitous Drop-off
7.01.75
Concrete Filler Walls
7.02
IMPACT ATTENUATORS
7.03
GLARE SCREEN
7.03.01
References
7.03.02
General
7.03.03
Criterion for Use
7.04
PAVEMENT MARKINGS
7.04.01
General
7.04.02
Temporary Pavement Markings
7.04.03
Pavement Marking Quantities
7.04.04
Removing Permanent Pavement Markings
7.04.05
Statutory Participating Cities
7.04.06
Witness, Log and Layout

ROAD DESIGN
7.05
TRAFFIC SIGNS AND ROADWAY DELINEATORS
7.05.01
Traffic Signs
7.05.02
Delineators
7.06
FENCING
7.06.01
References
7.06.02
Purpose of Fence
7.06.03
Types of Fence
A. Woven Wire Fence
B. Chain Link Fence
C. High Tensile Eight Wire Fence
7.06.04
Location of Fence
7.06.05
Use of Barbed Wire
7.06.06
Chain Link Fence
7.06.07
Gates in Chain Link Fence
7.06.08
Fencing Clear Vision Areas
7.06.09
Fencing Scenic Strips
7.06.10
Fencing Borrow Area Lakes and Retention Basins
7.06.11
Fence Between Twin Overpassing Structures
7.06.12
Guardrail in Conjunction With Fence
7.06.13
Temporary Fence
7.06.14
Protective Fence
7.06.15
Removing Fence
7.06.16
Screening Fence

ROAD DESIGN
7.07
NOISE BARRIERS
7.07.01
References
7.07.02
General
7.07.03
Technical Aspects of Sound Transmission
7.07.04
Current Requirements and Practices
7.07.05
Process for Type I Projects
7.07.06
Process for Type II Projects
7.07.07
Design Considerations for Noise Barriers
7.07.08
Types of Noise Barriers Used in Michigan
7.07.09
Landscape Treatment
7.08
MAILBOX POSTS
7.08.01
References
7.08.02
General
7.08.03
Design Considerations
7.09
CONCRETE STEPS
7.09.01
General

ROAD DESIGN
CHAPTER 7
APPURTENANCES
7.01
7.01.02 (revised 10-22-99)
ROADSIDE SAFETY BARRIERS
Application of Section 7.01
7.01.01 (revised 10-21-2013)
In writing this portion of Chapter 7 it should be

noted that the concepts presented will not
necessarily be considered as absolutes to be
rigidly adhered to, but will be considered as an
aid to enhance the engineering judgement of
the designer. Even when the word "should" is
used, it is recognized that there may be
circumstances unique to a situation that will
suggest, or even dictate, alteration of a
recommended treatment.
References
A. Guide for Selecting, Locating, and
Designing Traffic Barriers, AASHTO
1977
B. A Guide to Standardized Highway
Barrier
Rail
Hardware,
AASHTO-AGC-ARTBA Joint Committee,
1995
C. A Supplement to A Guide for Selecting,
Designing
and
Locating
Traffic
Barriers, Texas Transportation Institute
and FHWA, March 1980
D. Roadside Design Guide,
2011, 4th edition
It is also intended that the barrier treatments

recommended will be applicable to state
trunkline projects and not necessarily to local
government projects, except as local agencies
wish to incorporate them.
7.01.03 (revised 10-22-99)
AASHTO,
In addition, there are a number of National

Cooperative Highway Research Program
(NCHRP) research publications and reports of
the major research and testing agencies that
are available either within the Design Division
or in the Transportation Library.

The practice of placing an artificial obstruction
to prevent an errant vehicle from going down
a steep embankment or into an area of water
probably originated in the 1920's in the form of
a line of posts placed at the edge of the
shoulder. At some point in time the system
was improved by the addition of connecting
planks, which in turn were replaced by a more
maintenance-free system of two steel cables.
This design is illustrated on the old E-4-A-75
Series of standard plans. Following World
War II some metal beam designs were
introduced. One that found limited use in
Michigan was the Tuthill Highway Guard, a
convex smooth steel beam, 12" wide,
fastened to spring steel supports, which were
mounted on either wood or steel posts. In the
early 1950's the concept of a metal beam was
further refined with the introduction of the
W-beam with the two corrugations that are
essentially what we are familiar with today.

ROAD DESIGN
7.01.03 (continued)
7.01.03 (continued)
This initiated the development and use of a

number of proprietary terminals. The
Department has divided these terminals into
two basic categories of flared gating terminals
and tangent terminals. Current standard
designs are described in Section 7.01.25
along with other designs previously used.
Initially, the W-beam was not galvanized and

had to be painted. The next step was to
galvanize it for more economical maintenance.
The first installations of W-beam rail involved
attaching the beam element directly to posts
placed 12'-6" on centers, at a top of rail height
of 24". This design later became known as
our Beam Guardrail - Type A. Research and
crash testing in the late 1950's and early
1960's, principally by the state of California
and by General Motors at its Milford Proving
Grounds, produced the recommendations of
closer post spacing, (6'-3"), blocking out the
beam from the post, and a higher top of rail
mounting height. This resulted in Michigan's
development of our Beam Guardrail - Type C
in 1965, and Beam Guardrail - Type B in
1966. The most recent significant change in
guardrail type in Michigan occurred in 1984
with the adoption of thrie beam, now called
Guardrail, Type T.
Until 1995, Four basic end treatments had
been used in conjunction with steel beam
guardrail. Initially, a curved end shoe was
placed on both ends of the run. The concept
of turning down or burying the ending to form
an anchorage was developed about 1966.
The first standard plan to be approved by
what was then the Federal Bureau of Public
Roads was issued in 1968. A variation of the
turned down ending, featuring the elimination
of the first two posts (so the ending would
collapse under impact) appeared in 1971 with
the issuance of Standard Plan III-65A.
The Breakaway Cable Terminal (BCT) ending
was adopted in 1973 with the issuance of
Standard Plan III-58A. After 22 years as the
standard guardrail terminal in most states, the
FHWA disallowed further installation of the
BCT on the National Highway System (NHS)
after December 31, 1995. This, along with the
adoption of new crash testing criteria
(NCHRP 350) ended the use of the BCT as
well as other traditional un-patented endings.
Development of concrete barrier in this

country, principally concrete median barrier
having the concave safety shape, is generally
attributed jointly to General Motors and to the
state of New Jersey, both of whom conceived
shapes that bear their names. Michigan's first
concrete barrier was on the DeQuindre Yard
bridge, on I-94 in Detroit, in 1965. Although
the New Jersey shape was used in this initial
installation, the GM shape was adopted as
standard. In 1976 the New Jersey shape was
adopted as standard.
7.01.04
Section deleted

ROAD DESIGN
7.01.05 (revised 10-20-2008)
7.01.05 (continued)
Basic Concepts for Roadside Control
F. Longer runs of parallel barrier may be

required on upgrading projects, where less
than ideal existing conditions preclude the
use of flares as called for by Standard Plan
R-59-Series.
The following are basic concepts and design

options for the use or non-use of roadside
barriers. The primary sources of information
for roadside control are found in the AASHTO
documents listed in Section 7.01.01,
"References".
A. A collision with a roadside barrier is
considered a crash, because the barrier
itself is a roadside obstacle.
B. A roadside barrier may increase the
frequency of crashes, therefore a barrier
should only be installed if it will reduce the
severity of potential crashes.
C. When considering the design options for
roadside treatment and the progression of
design options basic concepts for
roadside control should be as follows.
1. Remove the obstacle or redesign it so
it can be safely traversed.
2. Relocate the obstacle to a point where
it is less likely to be struck.
3. Reduce impact severity by using an
appropriate breakaway or traversable
device.
4. Redirect a vehicle by shielding the
obstacle with a longitudinal traffic
barrier and/or crash cushion.
5. Delineate the obstacle if the above
alternatives are not appropriate.
D. Generally, a roadside barrier should be
placed as far from the traveled way as
conditions will permit.
See Section
7.01.30G.
E. Standard
Plan
R-59-Series
depicts
guardrail at approaches to bridges, both
over and under. It is intended for new
construction, where it is possible to grade
approach fill sections to accommodate the
flared ending. Generally, the more flare
that can be achieved, the shorter the rail
needs to be to afford the desired
protection.
G. To uniformly compute the length of need

for roadside barriers, a guardrail worksheet
has been developed and should be used
on both new and upgrading projects.
Computation methods used on this
worksheet complies with the guidelines
described in the Roadside Design Guide.
It still remains important that all designers
become familiar with the "Guide" to
understand the design process. For
determining the length of need when non
traversable embankments are the only
obstacles of concern, see Section 7.01.30.
The worksheet shall be used by all
designers, including consulting firms
performing work for the Department, to
compute guardrail length of needs.
The designer should fill in all data and
compute each individual barrier run. This
will assure proper compliance to standards
and allow each barrier run calculation to be
documented and checked for accuracy.
Construction field offices should be sent
the completed worksheets for reference
during project construction.
The worksheet does not cover all situations
which may occur in the field, although it is
expected to cover most installations. Any
situation not covered by the worksheet
shall be similarly documented, along with a
sketch providing the details of the guardrail
installation.
7.01.06 (1-20-2009)
Guardrail Worksheet
The guardrail worksheet is shown on the
following pages.
ROAD DESIGN MANUAL

ROAD DESIGN
7.01.10 (revised 10-21-2013)
7.01.10 (continued)
Clear Zone History
zone criteria that begins on page 15 of the

Barrier Guide by including a series of tables
prepared by the state of Illinois that show
clear zone requirements for various degrees
of curve. These criteria have been criticized
by a number of states because of the extreme
clear zone widths, particularly for the
combination of sharp curve, higher speed,
high traffic volume and steep slope.
For a number of years road designers and

safety authorities considered 30' a desirable
requirement for a safe roadside free of
obstacles. This was based upon a study by
General Motors in the early 1960's which
revealed that of 211 cases at the proving
grounds involving vehicles leaving the road,
80% did not travel more than 29' from the
edge of pavement. The 1967 Yellow Book
(Highway
Design
and
Operational
Practices Related to Highway Safety,
AASHTO), page 20, rounded this distance off
to 30'. The 2nd edition of the Yellow Book,
published in 1974, reiterated the 30' distance,
but called for an application of engineering
judgement by emphasizing that the "30'
distance is not a magic number" (page 38).
The 1977 Barrier Guide defined clear zone, in
the glossary on page iv, as "That roadside
border area, starting at the edge of the
traveled way, available for safe use by errant
vehicles. Establishment of a minimum width
clear zone implies that rigid objects and
certain other features with clearances less
than the minimum width should be removed,
relocated to an inaccessible position outside
the minimum clear zone, or remodeled to
make safely traversable, breakaway, or
shielded."
The 1977 Barrier Guide introduced the
concept that rate of sideslope, speed of traffic,
horizontal curvature, and ADT would affect the
width of clear zone. The 30' width was
retained for 60 mph speed in combination with
flat side slopes, tangent roadway alignment,
and ADT exceeding 6,000. However, a graph
on page 16 adjusts this basic 30' for traffic
speed and rate of sideslope.
These
adjustments are both up or down (wider or
narrower) for either descending or ascending
slope. A formula on page 17 further adjusts
the clear zone for horizontal curvature.
Finally, a procedure shown on pages 60-65
adjusts the clear zone downward (narrower)
for ADT's below 6,000. The Supplement to
the 1977 Barrier Guide expanded on the clear
In anticipation of a proposed revision of the

1977 Barrier Guide, FHWA in April 1986
afforded the states a measure of relief with
respect to clear zone requirements.
It
provided a formula for a curve correction
factor that is based upon increasing the value
for clear zone for a tangent section, obtained
from the Barrier Guide. This new formula is
more reasonable than the formula on page 17
of the Barrier Guide. It was adopted by the
Department in July 1986.
In 1989 the
Roadside Design Guide was issued by
AASHTO and adopted by MDOT as a guide.
Updates to the Roadside Design Guide were
published in 1996, 2002, 2006 and 2011.
7.01.11 (revised 10-21-2013)

Virtually everyone agrees that a flat, smooth,
unobstructed area adjacent to the driving
lanes is highly desirable and significantly
improves roadside safety. The only point of
contention is how wide to make this area. The
designer needs to understand that the clear
zone distance is not an absolute number.
Some designers have erroneously believed,
that in all cases, the need for protecting
motorists ends at the selected clear zone
distance.
ROAD DESIGN MANUAL

ROAD DESIGN
7.01.11 (continued)
7.01.11 (continued)
When evaluating existing conditions and when

designing rehabilitation projects, we should
attempt to use the higher values; however,
economics, existing field conditions, and other
restraints may justify using the lower values.
The Department measures the clear zone

from the outer edge of the through lane.
When determining clear zones in auxiliary
lane areas, use the volume of the through
lanes and the freeway design speed to obtain
the clear zone distance. The resulting clear
zone distance should be measured from the
outer edge of the through lane and is not to be
less than 23 ft out from the outer edge of the
auxiliary lane.
The Roadside Design Guide defines the
clear zone as a variable distance from the
traveled way, depending on design speed,
ADT, and embankment slope rate and
direction.
The Clear Zone Distances Table presents a
range of values that can be used for specific
conditions. These numbers are based on
limited data that was gathered under nontypical conditions and extrapolated to account
for sloped roadsides.
Also the values
obtained from the Clear Zone Distances Table
are based on an assumption of constant side
slope throughout the clear zone. They must
not be perceived as absolute. In situations
where the side slope changes within the
calculated clear zone, the clear zone must be
recalculated based upon a weighted average
calculation. An example of this procedure is
shown in Section 13.02.08 of this manual.
Application of the values in the Clear Zone
Distances Table is dependent on the extent of
work and the roadway classification. The
higher values should be used on new
construction, reconstruction and on all
freeways.
Clear zone for 3R-nonfreeway projects must

be selective and generally "fit" conditions
within the existing right-of-way and character
of the road. Some roadside improvements
that should be considered may include
removal, relocation, or shielding of such
obstacles as culvert headwalls, utility poles,
and bridge supports that are within the
selective clear zone.
The designer should also be aware that
current clear zone distances and 3R
guidelines serve as general guidance for
Heritage Routes (See Section 3.09). Narrow
pavement, narrow shoulders, winding and/or
rolling alinement, steep side slopes, roadside
obstacles and narrow right-of-way are
common characteristics of Heritage Routes
that sometimes prevent the use of even the
lower range of the Clear Zone table. Where
economic or environmental concerns are
great, and there is no history of crash
concentration, shorter clear zone distances
may be considered to preserve the
characteristics of the Heritage Route. Some
areas of concern may be addressed with
appropriate traffic signing. When distances
below the ranges offered in the Clear Zone
Distances Table are used, the rationale for the
alternative treatment should be noted in the
project file.
Tree removal should be considered as stated
in Section 3.09.03C. Some alternatives are
also offered in the next two sections (7.01.11A
and 7.01.11B).
ROAD DESIGN MANUAL

ROAD DESIGN
7.01.11 (continued)
7.01.11 (continued)
B. Treatment/Consideration of Obstacles
Inside the Calculated Project Clear
Zone
A.
Treatment/Consideration of Obstacles
Outside the Calculated Project Clear
Zone
Occasionally, there may be opportunities to

improve the roadside safety on a project for
small cost by addressing a few obstacles
outside the determined clear zone. Examples
of these opportunities are as follows:
1. When installing landscape items: Since
we have control over the location of new
items, we can provide additional
protection to the motorist by applying a
more generous clear area to these items.
For instance, our freeway guideline for a
long time has been to plant trees at least
50 feet off the edge of traffic lanes.
2. When isolated trees, volunteer growth,
utility poles, etc. are present: Depending
on aesthetic concerns, it may be possible
to offer the motorist a very generous clear
area (beyond that required by the Clear
Zone Distances tables) by simply
removing or relocating a few isolated
obstacles.
3. Obstacles near the bottom of a ditch are
more likely to be hit by an errant vehicle
since the ditch tends to funnel the vehicle.
Relocating the obstacle further up the
back slope, or even slightly up the front
slope (closer to road but still outside the
clear zone limit), would usually be
preferable.
4. A clear runout area beyond the toe of a
traversable (smooth and free of fixed
objects) but non-recoverable (between 1:4
and 1:3) foreslope is desirable since
vehicles traversing this steep slope are
likely to continue to the bottom. The
extent of this clear runout area can be
determined by subtracting the distance
between the edge of traveled way and the
breakpoint of recoverable foreslope from
the clear zone distance. This distance
should be at least 10' if feasible.
Where the following conditions exist, it may be

necessary to retain trees that otherwise would
be considered for removal.
1. At landscaped areas, parks, recreation or
residential areas or where the functional
and/or aesthetic values will be lost.
2. Exceptional or unique trees (because of
their size, species, or historic value).
3. On designated heritage roads and low
speed roads (including low speed urban
areas).
4. At locations where cumulative loss of
trees would result in a significant change
in character of the roadside landscape.
5. Behind nontraversable backslopes.
6. Behind barrier curbs, particularly in low
speed areas.
7. Where shrubs and/or ornamental trees
exist that would have a mature diameter of
4" or less at 4'-6" above ground line.
8. Where removal would adversely affect
endangered/threatened species, wetland,
water quality, or result in significant
erosion/sedimentation problems.
ROAD DESIGN MANUAL

ROAD DESIGN
7.01.11 (continued)
C. Clear Zone Distance Chart
CLEAR ZONE DISTANCES
(IN FEET FROM EDGE OF DRIVING LANE)
FILL SLOPES
DESIGN
SPEED
40 mph
or
Less
45-50
mph
55
mph
60
mph
65
mph
*
**
CUT SLOPES
DESIGN
ADT
1:6
OR
FLATTER
1:5
TO
1:4
1:3
1:3
1:4
TO
1:5
1:6
OR
FLATTER
under 750
7 - 10
7 - 10
**
7 - 10
7 - 10
7 - 10
750 - 1500
10 - 12
12 - 14
**
10 - 12
12 - 14
12 - 14
1500 - 6000
12 - 14
14 - 16
**
12 - 14
14 - 16
14 - 16
over 6000
14 - 16
16 - 18
**
14 - 16
16 - 18
16 - 18
under 750
10 - 12
12 - 14
**
8 - 10
8 - 10
10 - 12
750 - 1500
14 - 16
16 - 20
**
10 - 12
12 - 14
14 - 16
1500 - 6000
16 - 18
20 - 26
**
12 - 14
14 - 16
16 - 18
over 6000
20 - 22
24 - 28
**
14 - 16
18 - 20
20 - 22
under 750
12 - 14
14 - 18
**
8 - 10
10 - 12
10 - 12
750 - 1500
16 - 18
20 - 24
**
10 - 12
14 - 16
16 - 18
1500 - 6000
20 - 22
24 - 30
**
14 - 16
16 - 18
20 - 22
over 6000
22 - 24
26 - 32*
**
16 - 18
20 - 22
22 - 24
under 750
16 - 18
20 - 24
**
10 - 12
12 - 14
14 - 16
750 - 1500
20 - 24
26 - 32*
**
12 - 14
16 - 18
20 - 22
1500 - 6000
26 - 30
32 - 40*
**
14 - 18
18 - 22
24 - 26
over 6000
30 - 32*
36 - 44*
**
20 - 22
24 - 26
26 - 28
under 750
18 - 20
20 - 26
**
10 - 12
14 - 16
14 - 16
750 - 1500
24 - 26
28 - 36*
**
12 - 16
18 - 20
20 - 22
1500 - 6000
28 - 32*
34 - 42*
**
16 - 20
22 - 24
26 - 28
over 6000
30 - 34*
38 - 46*
**
22 - 24
26 - 30
28 - 30
Where a site specific investigation indicates a high probability of continuing crashes, or such
occurrences are indicated by crash history, the designer may provide clear zone distances greater
than 30 feet as indicated. Clear zones may be limited to 30 feet for practicality and to provide a
consistent roadway template if previous experience with similar projects or designs indicates
satisfactory performance.
Since recovery is less likely on the unshielded, traversable 1:3 slopes, fixed objects should not be
present in the vicinity of the toe of these slopes.
ROAD DESIGN MANUAL

ROAD DESIGN
7.01.11 (continued)
D. Curve Correction Factors Table
The Curve Correction Factors Table shown below shall be applied to horizontal curves 2 or greater.
The curve correction factor (Kcz) shall be applied to the outside of curve only. The inside portion of
the curve will be treated as a tangent section.
CURVE CORRECTION FACTORS (Kcz)
DESIGN SPEED (mph)
Radius
(ft)
40
45
50
55
60
65
70
2950
2300
1.1
1.1
1.1
1.1
1.1
1.2
1.2
1.2
1.2
1.2
1.2
1.2
1.2
1.3
1970
1.1
1.2
1.2
1.2
1.3
1.3
1.4
1640
1.1
1.2
1.2
1.3
1.3
1.3
1.4
1475
1.2
1.2
1.3
1.3
1.4
1.4
1.5
1315
1.2
1.2
1.3
1.3
1.4
1.4
1150
1.2
1.2
1.3
1.4
1.5
1.5
985
1.2
1.3
1.4
1.5
1.5
1.5
820
1.3
1.3
1.4
1.5
660
1.3
1.4
1.5
495
1.4
1.5
330
1.5
7.01.11 (continued)
7.01.11 (continued)
E. Other Controlling Factors
Continued efforts should be made to reduce

these obstacles as finances permit, even
though some cannot be removed without
great
difficulty,
because
of
socio-environmental considerations, e.g.,
mature shade trees in a west-facing front
yard. However safety considerations should
overrule, and if need be, even these mature
shade trees may have to be removed.
For free access highways, the clear zone

should ideally be the same as for controlled
access highways, but often this is impossible
as it would require complete reconstruction of
the highway, and destruction of the existing
roadside features. Clear zone may often be
restricted by drives, intersections, ditches,
narrow R.O.W., and other features. While it
may be argued that the dynamics of a vehicle
running off the road are no different on a free
access road than they are on a limited access
facility, it remains as a fact of life that there will
always be obstacles of some description on
free access roads - mailboxes, driveway
embankments,
trees,
buildings,
etc.
Enormous numbers of these obstacles occur
on the trunkline system.
The designer should note that the presence of

an up-slope significantly reduces the clear
zone width required. It is therefore seldom
necessary to remove a tree or to shield an
obstacle that is located at the top of a
cut-slope if the elevation of the top of slope is
approximately 5'-0" to 6'-0" higher than the
edge of pavement. These situations should
always be checked, however.
ROAD DESIGN MANUAL

ROAD DESIGN
7.01.12 (revised 1-20-2010)
7.01.12 (continued)
Types of Guardrail Used in Michigan
D. Type C (old Standard Plan III-60E)
There are seven principal types of steel beam

guardrail in addition to cable guardrail found
on Michigan highways. The term "Current
Use" means "currently proposed for use", not
necessarily what may be found existing in the
field.
Description: Upper beam blocked out (similar

to Type B) but has a lower beam attached
directly to the post. 6'-3" post spacing, 32
height to top of rail.
A. Type A (Standard Plan R-60-Series)

Description: W-beam attached directly to
posts, Terminal End Shoes on ends. 12'-6"
post spacing, 28" height to top of rail.
Current Use:
1. Cul-de-sacs
2. Limited to locations not exposed to
through traffic.
B. Type B (Standard Plan R-60-Series)
Description: W-beam guardrail, 8" offset
blocks. 6'-3" post spacing, 28" height to top of
rail.
Current Use:
1. Basic type for all free access trunklines.
2. On local roads when part of a state
trunkline project.
C. Type BD (Standard Plan R-60-Series)
Description: Type B with W-beam on both
sides of the post, 8" offset blocks.
Current Use:
1. Limited use in medians on free access
highways when median barrier is
recommended.
Current Use:
1. Repairing runs of existing Type C (ask for
copy of old standard for use as a Special
Detail).
E. Type CD (old Standard Plan III-60E)
Description: Similar to Type C except beam
elements are installed on both sides of the
post.
Current Use:
1. Repairing runs of existing Type CD (ask
for copy of old standard for use as Special
Detail).
F. Type T (Standard Plan R-60-Series)
Description: Offset thrie beam rail, 8" offset
blocks, 6'-3" post spacing, 34" height to top of
rail.
Current Use:
1. Standard guardrail for new freeway
construction (including ramps).
2. Updating existing freeways and ramps
when the entire run of guardrail is being
removed and replaced.
ROAD DESIGN MANUAL

ROAD DESIGN
7.01.12 (continued)
7.01.14 (revised 12-22-2011)
Types of Guardrail used in Michigan
G. Type TD (Standard Plan R-60-Series)
A. Galvanized
Description: Similar to Type T except beam

elements and offset blocks are installed on
both sides of the post.
For a short time in the early to mid-1950's, the

first steel W-beam guardrail was not
galvanized and therefore had to be painted.
Subsequently, galvanized beam elements
were supplied and have been used ever since
except, of course, for the use of weathering
steel. The galvanizing coating is considered
to have a service life of at least 25 years
under average conditions before exhibiting
significant rusting.
Some of the earlier
accepted
galvanized
rails
were
"pre-galvanized" and had very thin zinc
coatings.
These have rusted at a
considerably premature age. From that time,
a heavier galvanizing was applied by hot dip
method after forming. This exhibited good
durability.
The industry asked for
reconsideration of the pre-galvanized method
in 1995. The Construction Field Services
Division performed a study to determine the
weather resistance of pre-galvanized rail. The
results of an accelerated weathering
simulation
were
acceptable.
The
specifications now allow for either method of
galvanizing.
Current Use:
1. In freeway medians over 30' wide when
median barrier is recommended. Used to
update existing freeway medians when
there is a significant length of guardrail
being replaced or where none was
constructed initially, but barrier is now
recommended.
H. Cable Barrier (See Section 7.0155C)
Description: Three or four steel cables
mounted on steel posts, anchored and
tensioned.
Current Use:
1. Medians where crash history indicates
cross median crashes and rigid barrier is
not warranted.
2. Special situations where up to 90 degree
impacts can be expected and larger
deflections can be tolerated.
7.01.13
Curved Beam Elements
Curved steel beam elements having a radius
of 150' or less must be shop bent. Designers
should try to be as accurate as possible when
specifying a radius for curved rail, as it is time
consuming and expensive returning elements
to the shop for re-bending. When shop bent
rail will be required, the following note should
be included on the plans: "Shop bent curved
guardrail elements shall not be ordered until
the radius has been field verified by the
Engineer."
B. Unpainted Corrosion-Resistant
Atmospheric corrosion resistant guardrail
(sometimes referred to as "weathering" or
"rusty steel" guardrail) was first installed in
Michigan, at 3 test sites, in 1963. It was
adopted as standard by the Department in late
1971. If galvanized beam was desired, and it
was in certain locations where visibility was
especially needed, then it had to be specified
on the plans and in the pay item. The theory
behind the development of this material was
that, being uncoated, it would oxidize rather
quickly to a uniform brown color, the chemistry
of the steel causing the surface rust to be
dense and adherent. After the initial surface
rust had formed, it was thought that further
oxidation would proceed very slowly as the
oxides would form a protective coating,
making painting unnecessary. Initially, the
ROAD DESIGN MANUAL

ROAD DESIGN
7.01.14B (continued)
7.01.15 (continued)
A. Guardrail Approach Terminal, Type 1B

(Standard Plan R-61-Series)
buffered endings were galvanized, but in 1976

it was decided to specify corrosion resistant
steel for them as well. In early 1980 a
moratorium was placed on the use of
weathering steel, requiring all new guardrail
be galvanized according to the former
requirements. The moratorium was prompted
by the discovery that, when chloride
contamination occurred, oxidation of the metal
did not slow up after the initial rusting, and
crevice corrosion accelerated the attack on
the overlapped surfaces. Concerns were
expressed that the useful life of the rail would
be considerably less than that originally
anticipated.
The moratorium led to a
permanent discontinuation of the use of
weathering steel.
C.
Corrosion-Resistant Guardrail
Replacement Policy
The Engineering Operations Committee,

meeting on January 20, 1989, decided that all
existing corrosion resistant, or "rusty steel",
guardrail encountered on proposed Interstate
resurfacing or reconstruction projects should
be removed and replaced as part of the
project. On projects involving bridges only, the
nominal provisions of the approach guardrail
anchorage shall be replaced if the rail
elements are rusty steel. Where guardrail at
the bridge approaches is part of a more
extensive installation, the decision to replace
will be made on the merits of the specific
project. See Section 7.01.44 for upgrading
local roads.
7.01.15 (revised 8-29-2011)

Guardrail Terminals
The following guardrail terminal details are in
current use for new construction and where
specified for updating:
Current Use:
1. On approach end of Guardrail, Type B, on
one-way roadways.
2. On both ends of Guardrail, Type B, on
two-way roadways.
B. Guardrail Approach Terminal, Type 1T
Current Use:
1. On approach end of Guardrail, Type T, on
one-way roadways.
2. On both ends of Guardrail, Type T, on
two-way roadways.
C. Guardrail Approach Terminal, Type 2B
Current Use:
1. Same as Type 1B when grading limits
prohibit proper offset for Type 1B.
D. Guardrail Approach Terminal, Type 2T
Current Use:
1. Same as Type 1T when grading limits
prohibit proper offset for Type for 1T.
E. Guardrail Departing Terminal, Type B
Current Use:
1. Departing end of Guardrail, Type B, on
one-way roadways.
2. Departing end of Guardrail, Type B, on
two-way roadways when located outside
the clear zone.
F. Guardrail Departing Terminal, Type T
Current Use:
1. Departing end of Guardrail, Type T, on
one-way roadways.
2. Departing end of Guardrail, Type T, on
two-way roadways when located outside
the clear zone.
ROAD DESIGN MANUAL

ROAD DESIGN
7.01.16
7.01.16 (continued)
Guardrail Attachment to Bridges and Walls
E. Guardrail Anchorages, Bridge, Detail T-5

The following guardrail anchorage details are

in current use for new construction and where
specified for upgrading and are detailed on
Standard Plans R-67-Series, B-22-Series,
B-23-Series:
A. Guardrail Anchorage, Bridge, Detail T-1
Current Use: (Two uses detailed)
1. Use when connecting Guardrail, Type T to
Bridge Barrier Railing, Type 4 without
expansion at backwall.
Bridge Barrier Railing, Type 4 with
B. Guardrail Anchorage, Bridge, Detail T-2
Current Use:
1. Use when connecting Guardrail, Type B to
C. Guardrail Anchorage, Bridge, Detail T-3
Current Use:
Current Use: (Two uses detailed)

Bridge Barrier Railing, Type 4 with
Fillerwalls.
F. Guardrail Anchorages, Bridge, Detail T-6
Current Use:
Fillerwalls.
G. Guardrail Anchorages, Bridge, Detail A-1
(Standard Plans B-22-Series and
B-23-Series)
Current Use:
Bridge Railing, Thrie Beam Retrofit.
H. Guardrail Anchorages, Bridge, Detail A-2
(Standard Plans B-22-Series and
B-23-Series)
Current Use:
Bridge Railing, Thrie Beam Retrofit.
I.
Need for Additional Expansion
The Guardrail Anchorage, Bridge details on

Standard Plan R-67-Series will accommodate
thermal deck movement up to about 4". If the
expected thermal deck movement will exceed
4", the Road designer should consult with the
Bridge designer to decide the method for
providing the additional expansion required in
the guardrail.
ROAD DESIGN MANUAL

ROAD DESIGN
7.01.17 (revised 2-18-2014)
7.01.17 (continued)
Strength Requirements of Steel Beam

Guardrail
There are up to six test levels in NCHRP 350

and MASH, respectively, depending on the
feature being evaluated. All six test levels
apply to longitudinal barriers. Test levels 2
and 3 apply to breakaway features and test
levels 1, 2, and 3 apply to crash cushions and
end treatments.
The Standard Specifications reference

material requirements for steel beam guardrail
and associated hardware to AASHTO
Specification
M 180,
which
requires
70,000 psi tensile strength in the base metal.
Crash testing of roadside safety devices, such
as guardrail and other barriers, is
standardized according to procedures outlined
in National Cooperative Highway Research
Program Report 350 (NCHRP 350) and the
Manual for Assessing Safety Hardware
(MASH), respectively.
MASH contains the current guidelines for
testing and evaluating roadside safety
devices, thereby superseding NCHRP 350. As
of January 1, 2011, newly tested or modified
roadside safety devices must be evaluated
using MASH criteria. However, all safety
hardware accepted prior to adoption of MASH
using NCHRP 350 criteria may remain in
place and may continue to be manufactured
and installed. As a result, it is acceptable to
install new roadside safety devices that meet
NCHRP 350 or MASH. MDOT-approved
roadside safety hardware not accepted under
NCHRP 350 or MASH with no suitable
alternatives may remain in place and may
continue to be installed.
Fundamentally, guardrail is intended to

redirect the impacting vehicle, not stop it.
Energy absorption and vehicle deceleration
are the functions of an impact attenuator (or a
Type 2 terminal, under certain conditions).
For this reason, 25 degrees is the maximum
angle used in testing for guardrail strength.
The designer will occasionally encounter
situations where a broad area must be
shielded. These may be areas wide enough
to allow a vehicle to exceed 25 degrees in
approach angle and too wide to make an
impact attenuator feasible. These situations
must be studied. The solution will usually
involve guardrail placed in a curving
configuration or the use of cable barrier if
there is room for the deflection that is
characteristic of a cable barrier.
Impact Conditions
NCHRP 350
Test Level
Vehicle
Nominal
Speed (km/h)
Nominal
Angle (deg)
2000P (2000 kg pick up truck)
50
25
70
25
100
25
8000S (8000 kg single unit truck)
80
15
3600V (3600 kg tractor van trailer)
80
15
3600T (3600 kg tractor tanker-type trailer)
80
15
ROAD DESIGN MANUAL

ROAD DESIGN
7.01.17 (continued)
Strength Requirements of Steel Beam
Guardrail
MASH
Test Level
Test Vehicle
Designation and Type
Impact Conditions
Vehicle Weight
Kg (lbs)
Speed
km/h (mph)
Angle
Degrees
1,100C (Passenger Car)

2,270P (Pickup Truck)
1,100 (2,420)
2,270 (5,000)
50 (31)
50 (31)
25
25

1,100 (2,420)
2,270 (5,000)
70 (44)
70 (44)
25
25

1,100 (2,420)
2,270 (5,000)
100 (62)
100 (62)
25
25

10,000S (Single Unit Truck)
1,100 (2,420)
2,270 (5,000)
10,000 (22,000)
100 (62)
100 (62)
90 (56)
25
25
15

36,000V (Tractor-Van Trailer)
1,100 (2,420)
2,270 (5,000)
36,000 (79,300)
100 (62)
100 (62)
80 (50)
25
25
15

36,000T (Tractor-Tank Trailer)
1,100 (2,420)
2,270 (5,000)
36,000 (79,300)
100 (62)
100 (62)
80 (50)
25
25
15
7.01.18 (revised 10-21-2013)

Suggested Shy Line Offset Values
Shy line offset is the distance from the edge of traveled way in which a roadside object will not be
perceived as an obstacle or result in the driver reducing speed or changing the vehicle's path of
travel.
Design Speed (mph)
80
Shy Line Offset (LS) (ft)

12
75
10
70
60
55
50
6.5
45
40
30
ROAD DESIGN MANUAL

ROAD DESIGN
7.01.19 (revised 10-21-2013)
Suggested Runout Lengths for Barrier Design
Runout length is the distance from the object being shielded to the point the vehicle is assumed to
depart from the roadway.
Traffic Volume (ADT) veh/day
Over 10,000
Over
5,000-10,000
1000-5000
Under 1000
Design Speed
(mph)
Runout Length
LR (ft)
Runout Length
LR (ft)
Runout Length
LR (ft)
Runout Length
LR (ft)
70
360
330
290
250
60
300
250
210
200
50
230
190
160
150
40
160
130
110
100
30
110
90
80
70
7.01.20 (revised 10-21-2013)
7.01.20 (continued)
Guardrail Deflection
Section 7.01.41D, "8'-0" Posts". See also

Section 5.5.2, 2011 AASHTO Roadside
Design Guide.
Being flexible barriers, both steel beam

guardrail and cable guardrail are expected to
deflect under impact. This deflection is a
result of deformation of the beam element or
stretching of the steel cable, fracturing of the
post (if wood) or bending of the post (if steel),
and lateral displacement of the post in the soil.
It is therefore necessary that room for
deflection be provided between the back of
the rail system (back of posts) and the object
or area being shielded. For design purposes,
use the chart at the end of this section for the
expected deflections of the various barrier
systems.
It should be noted that the above deflection
distances are not well-defined values, and that
deflections may vary for different soil types
and moisture content, thawed or frozen
ground, different types of anchorages, and
differing lengths of installation. If specific site
conditions are such that it is predictable that
greater deflection values may occur, and
space for deflection is restricted, then shorter
post spacing or deeper embedment of posts
should be considered. Shorter post spacing is
only effective, however, if the full effect of
proper post embedment is realized. See
Guardrail
Post
Spacing
Deflection
Type T
1'-6
1'-2"
Type T
3'-1
1'-8"
Type T
6'-3"
2'-0"
Type C
6'-3"
2'-0"
Type B
3'-1
2'-0"
Type B
6'-3"
3'-0"
3-Cable
8'-0"
11'-6"
The Zone of Intrusion (ZOI) is the region

measured above and behind the face of a
barrier system where an impacting vehicle or
any major part of the system may extend
during an impact. For a typical TL-3 system,
the ZOI extends between 18" and 30" behind
the traffic side face of the barrier. Where
practical, the designer should keep objects out
of this area. See Section 5.5.2, 2011 AASHTO
Roadside Design Guide, for additional ZOI
guidance.
ROAD DESIGN MANUAL

ROAD DESIGN
7.01.21 (revised 10-21-2013)
7.01.21 (continued)
Guardrail Strength Transitions

Sudden and significant changes in lateral
stiffness of a barrier system may cause an
impacting vehicle to pocket, if it proceeds from
a weaker system to a stronger system. A
gradual modification of the deflection
characteristics of the barrier is therefore
needed. This may be achieved by closer post
spacing, heavier barrier elements, larger posts
or a combination of these. Illustrated below is
a typical transition from Guardrail, Type B to a

concrete barrier, filler wall, or barrier railing.
The 2011 AASHTO, Roadside Design Guide
(page 7-15) advocates that the transition
length between joining barrier types should be
approximately 10 to 12 times the difference in
dynamic deflection.
For a difference in
deflection of 12", the transition stiffening
length should occur in one effective beam
element length or 12'-6". See Section 7.01.20
for dynamic deflections.
7.01.22 (10-22-99)
7.01.23 (revised 10-21-2013)
Minimum Guardrail Lengths and Gaps
A free-standing section of guardrail (one not

attached to a bridge or other structure) should
be at least 100' in length. Greater lengths are
recommended;
lesser
lengths
maybe
acceptable under low speed conditions. A
gap of less than approximately 200' between
barrier installations should be avoided.
Usually this will require filling in the gap with
connecting barrier. An exception would be the
unique situation where an approach and
trailing ending, separated by a gap, can be
buried in a cut slope, and the consequences
of a vehicle encroaching on the cut slope
would be less than hitting the guardrail filling
the gap.
It is essential that the designer understand the

function of the various components of a
guardrail system and some of the principles
underlying barrier design details.
Beam height - The 28" top of rail height of
single beam systems is a compromise
between satisfying the conflicting demand of
meeting the centers of gravity of heavier,
higher cars and of smaller, lower cars. The
use of a second beam element (Type C), or of
a wider beam element (Type T), permits the
32" and 34" top of rail heights that cover a
broader range of center of gravity heights.
ROAD DESIGN MANUAL

ROAD DESIGN
7.01.23 (continued)
7.01.24
Accommodation of Expansion
Offset block - Serves two principal purposes,

1) locates beam farther from the post to
minimize the possibility of wheel snagging on
the post and pocketing in the guardrail, and 2)
maintains top of rail height momentarily longer
as the post rotates backward under impact,
reducing the probability of the vehicle vaulting
over the rail. (See page 5-16, 2011 AASHTO,
Roadside Design Guide)
Provision must be made for the movement of

guardrail beam elements caused by thermal
expansion and contraction. The movement in
rail elements is accomplished by means of
oblong slots at the splices.
Additional
expansion at structures is obtained by means
of longer slots in the Special End Shoes and
Thrie Beam Expansion Section illustrated on
Standard Plan R-67-Series (see Section
7.01.16I).
Round washer - Provides an even bearing

surface around holes that are often
field-drilled and rough.
Post bolt washer - To prevent the head of
the post bolt from pulling through the beam
element. Recent recommendations, nationally,
have been to delete the washer, on new
construction, to allow the rail to strip off the
posts and thus not go down under impact.
Washers are now recommended only on the
end post of the SRT, or on the end post in a
Departing End Terminal.
Rail splice - Splices, of course, are
unavoidable. They should be at least as
strong as the rail itself; all eight connection
bolts (twelve in thrie beam) are needed to
distribute the load throughout the rail section.
Lapped splices are usually such that the outer
rail overlaps in the downstream direction, to
prevent vehicle snagging.
ROAD DESIGN MANUAL

ROAD DESIGN
7.01.25 (revised 10-21-2013)
7.01.25A (continued)
2. Flared Energy Absorbing Terminal

(FLEAT)
Crashworthy end treatments are critical to

guardrail installations. An approach terminal
is designed to redirect an impacting vehicle
and to reduce the occurrences of a vehicle
being penetrated, rolled, or vaulted in an end
on hit. The following section describes the
characteristics and uses of approved standard
treatments.
A. Type 1 Terminals
Type 1 Guardrail Approach Terminals are
flared gating terminals. This is the preferred
design when grading limits allow for the
appropriate 4'-0" offset of the terminal end
from the tangent extension of the standard
line of guardrail run. When the Type 1 terminal
is called for on plans by reference to Standard
Plan R-61-Series, the contractor may use one
of two terminal options. Descriptions of the
current approved options are described in this
section.
1. Slotted Rail Terminal (SRT)
The SRT was adopted by the Department in
1995 when FHWA mandated the discontinued
use of the BCT. It subsequently became the
first guardrail terminal to pass the NHCRP
Report 350 crash test criteria.
The concept of a slotted rail terminal consists
of longitudinal slots cut into the W-beam rail
element to control the location of dynamic
buckling thus reducing the potential for impact
or penetration of the occupant compartment
by the buckled rail element.
The SRT was originally intended as a retrofit
or replacement for the BCT ending.
The SRT uses many of the same components
used in the BCT. It also uses features
common to other end treatments such as the
yoke and strut and controlled release terminal
(CRT) posts. The parabolic flare of the SRT is
identical to that of the BCT, simplifying the
retrofit of existing terminals.
FLEAT was adopted in 1998 after it passed

NCHRP Report 350 crash testing. Among
other reasons, it was chosen as an alternate
for the SRT because of the similarities in the
components and installation configuration of
the two systems. In addition to these
similarities to the SRT and other flared
terminals, the FLEAT includes an energy
absorbing impact head. Unlike the SRT, the
4'-0" offset of the FLEAT is a straight taper
rather than a parabolic flare.
3. Minimum Offset
The Type 1 Terminal is designed to have a
minimum offset of 4'-0", measured from the
tangent line of the guardrail run. Whenever
conditions allow, the line of guardrail designed
in advance of the terminal should be flared to
further increase the total offset of the terminal
from the traveled lane. On curved roadways
the offset is measured from the circular
extension of the standard rail alignment along
the curve.
Sometimes on certain minor trunklines and a
great number of local roads, the end post may
have to be placed on the slope beyond the
shoulder hinge point, in which case care
should be taken that the terminal end shoe
and the steel sleeves are not left "high" nor
placed too low.
B. Type 2 Terminals
Type 2 terminals are tangent, energy
absorbing terminals. They are used when
proper grading cannot be achieved to
accommodate the 4'-0" offset called for with
the Type 1 terminals.
When the Type 2
terminal is called for on plans by reference to
Standard Plan R-62-Series, the contractor
may use one of two terminal options.
Descriptions of the currently approved options
are described in the following sections.
ROAD DESIGN MANUAL

ROAD DESIGN
4. Minimum Offset
1. Extruder Terminal (ET)
The original intent of the Type 2 terminals was

to provide endings that required no offset.
This was the orientation used in the crash
tested system. It was later determined by the
FHWA that a 12" offset would be acceptable
without further testing. This minimal offset
was adopted in Standard Plan R-62-Series in
order to minimize the number of nuisance
accidents that may occur when the impact
head was located close to or encroaching on
the shoulder.
The ET was installed experimentally by the

Department in 1993 and was used
occasionally when special situations called for
a non flared terminal. In 1995 the ET became
the first non-flared terminal to meet the
NCHRP Report 350 crash test criteria.
Frequent use of the ET led to its upgraded
status as a standard plan in 1997. It features
an impact head that, when hit head on,
flattens the guardrail beam element as the
head translates down the terminal rail. The
flattened rail is then extruded away from the
impacting vehicle.
2. Beam Eating Steel Terminal (BEST)
At the same time the ET was originally
approved as a standard, the BEST was
chosen as an approved alternate option. Its
status as a standard was short lived when the
SKT (see succeeding section) replaced it
months after its adoption. The BEST featured
an impact head that shredded and flattened
the rail before extruding it. The developers
and patent holders of the BEST discontinued
marketing and production of this product
shortly after they developed and patented the
SKT.
3. Sequential Kinking Terminal (SKT)
The SKT was successfully crash tested in
1997 and adopted by the Department as a
standard Type 2 terminal alternate in 1998,
replacing the BEST.
The materials and
configuration of the SKT were more
compatible with the ET. Like the FLEAT, its
impact head includes a deflector plate that
produces sequential kinks in the beam
element before extruding it away from the
impacting vehicle.
C. Function of the Various

Terminal Components
Guardrail
It is important that designers, as well as

construction and maintenance personnel,
understand the function of the components
that make up Guardrail terminals:
Bearing plate - Distributes the forces in
the cable to the wooden end post and
steel sleeve. The slotted bearing plate
design featured in the SRT, allows the
bearing plate to separate from the cable
upon breaking of the wooden end post.
Terminal End Shoe - This feature of the
SRT absorbs some of the impact forces,
spreading them over a wider area, to
reduce the potential for the end of the
beam element to penetrate the vehicle
passenger compartment.
ROAD DESIGN MANUAL

ROAD DESIGN
7.01.25C (continued)
Impact head - The impact head or
extruder head absorbs energy in an end
on hit. Like the terminal end shoe, it
spreads the forces over a wider area.
In addition, the rail element passes
through the head and is extruded away
from the impacting vehicle. The FLEAT
and the SKT head contains a deflector
plate that creates sequential kinks in the
rail as it passes through. The ET head
flattens the rail as it passes through. The
bending or flattening dissipates energy
while preventing rail penetration into the
vehicle.
Cable - For downstream impacts,
transfers tensile forces from the beam to
the base of the end post, allowing the full
redirective strength of the rail system to be
developed at the third post. For ending
impacts the cable is released and serves
no purpose.
Channel Strut - This strut and yoke
distributes the load from the tensioned
cable between the first and second post.
The strut also contributes to the collapse
of the second post during an end on
impact.
Controlled release terminal (CRT) post CRT posts are 6" x 8" wood posts with two
3 diameter holes drilled through the
post. One hole is placed at the ground
line and the other 1'-4" below the ground,
to facilitate fracture of the post during
end-on impacts.
Holes in the two end posts - These
holes are used to weaken the end posts
and to allow them to break off close to the
ground, when the guardrail ending is
struck by an end impacting vehicle. The
guardrail ending will likely collapse,
thereby reducing spearing and vaulting.
The holes have no function for
downstream impacts.
Pipe Insert - No function for ending
impacts.
For downstream impacts,
distributes vertical component of forces in
the cable to the post.
Slotted Rail Element (SRT) - The first
two panels of rail in the SRT are slotted to
provide controlled dynamic buckling. Rail
buckling in the SRT is controlled by the
length and location of the slots. The
controlled buckling of the rail element
reduces the potential for the rail to directly
impact or penetrate the vehicle occupant
compartment.
Slot guard (SRT) - Slot guards are
installed on the SRT at the downstream
end of each set of rail slots. It prevents
the bumper or other parts of the impacting
vehicle from intruding into and extending
the slots.
Soil plate - Inhibits movement of the post
in the soil; aids in keeping the post from
pulling out of the ground.
Steel sleeves - For ending impacts,
reduces tendency for the post to rotate in
the soil; aids in resisting movement so the
post will break off at the weakening hole.
For downstream impacts, distributes loads
from the post to the soil.
ROAD DESIGN MANUAL

ROAD DESIGN
7.01.25 (continued)
7.01.25 (continued)
F. Burying Ending in a Backslope
D. Guardrail Full Strength Point
Occasionally high cut slopes adjacent to the

traveled roadway do not provide sufficient
clear area behind a Type 1 terminal to allow
gating.
When a standard guardrail terminal is used,

the length of need is calculated to a point
where the guardrail run develops the full
strength of the system. This point on the
approach end is considered to be the third
post from the end (page 5-51, 2011 AASHTO,
Roadside Design Guide).
The designer should consider terminating the

guardrail inside the backslope. The designer
or project manager can obtain a special detail
for this treatment from the Design Standards
Unit.
E. Clear Area Behind Guardrail Terminals

G. Slope Under Guardrail Terminals
When determining the length of need of a
guardrail run, the designer should verify that
there will be no obstacle behind or to the
behind side of a guardrail terminal that would
prevent gating.
This is especially true with the Type 1 terminal
since it is specifically designed to gate.
The area behind should be traversable for the
vehicle after it passes through the terminal.
The minimum recovery area behind and
beyond a terminal should be an obstacle free
area approximately 75' long and 20' wide. If it
appears that the area behind will not be
traversable, then the guardrail run will
probably have to be extended to a point where
the area behind the terminal is clear.
The area under the terminal should be graded

to a 1:10 slope or flatter from the edge of the
traveled lane to the shoulder hinge point (2'-0"
behind the face of the post).
See the
appropriate guardrail approach terminal
Standard Plans for grading details.
ROAD DESIGN MANUAL

ROAD DESIGN
7.01.29 (revised 10-21-2013)
Guardrail Flare
When designing guardrail, the designer
should take advantage of opportunities to flare
the installation. This reduces the required
length of need. It also places the guardrail
terminal farther from the traveled lane, thus
reducing the potential for nuisance hits.
A. Flare Rate
Historically, 1:15 has been the preferred flare
rate for guardrail in Michigan.
Other
maximum flare rates for semi-rigid barriers are
listed on page 5-48 of the 2011 AASHTO,
Roadside Design Guide and on Standard
Plan R-59-Series according to design speed.
Flatter flare rates listed by AASHTO for barrier
inside the shy line should only be used where
it will not increase the length of the guardrail
run.
B. Uniform Flare from Structures
Guardrail may need to be flared inward to
meet the bridge barrier railing of bridges with
narrow shoulders. When the guardrail length
at a structure is increased, such as for an
embankment, a uniform guardrail flare rate
(not flatter than 1:30) may be substituted for
the combined short parallel section and the
two flared sections. The Illustration at right
shows this situation on a left approach rail.
When the shielded area in advance of the
bridge rail is a steep embankment, the length
of need is determined as outlined in Standard
Plan R-59-Series. A uniform flare can then be
constructed from the end of the tangent length
of barrier at the bridge rail (L1) to the first post
of the guardrail terminal at offset distance z.
ROAD DESIGN MANUAL

ROAD DESIGN
7.01.30 (revised 8-18-2014)
7.01.30 (continued)
The economics of earthwork obviously dictate

that all slopes cannot be 1:6, regardless of fill
height. As the fill becomes higher, more
consideration must be given to steepening the
slopes, which in turn may call for a decision
relative to placing a barrier.
As a general rule, a barrier should be placed

to protect a vehicle from going down an
embankment only if the barrier itself is the
least severe of the two features. Such a
comparison must of necessity be very
subjective because of the many variables
involved. The Department generally follows
the criterion that, if the fill slope is 1:3 or
flatter, no barrier is required. For slopes of 1:3
or flatter, the height of fill does not increase
severity.
A. Height-Slope Guidelines
Slopes intended to be traversable, i.e., one

flat enough that a barrier can be omitted but
still perhaps 1:3, should be relatively free of
discontinuities that might "trip up" a vehicle.
Plans should note that half-buried boulders
and large rocks should be removed as part of
the final trimming operation.
ROAD DESIGN MANUAL

ROAD DESIGN
7.01.30 (continued)
B. Location on Fill Sections (New Construction)
The following shoulder sections with guardrail are shown to clarify and standardize the location of
guardrail. Divided highway sections illustrate guardrail on left and right shoulders of each roadway.
* See Section 6.05.04D for paved shoulder widening at guardrail sections.

** The 2 offset from face of guardrail to edge of shoulder should not be used if the paved shoulder
width is at least 12.
ROAD DESIGN MANUAL

ROAD DESIGN
7.01.30 (continued)
7.01.30 (continued)
F. Length of Barrier at Embankments

(Upgrading Projects)
C. Maximum Height of 1:2 Slope

Without Barrier
Barrier is not warranted on 1:2 fill slopes up to
about 5' height.
See Section 7.01.30A,
Height-Slope Guidelines.
When a flared guardrail installation is not

feasible and a parallel guardrail installation
must be used, the following chart and diagram
should be used to determine the length of
barrier needed in advance of a 1:3 slope.
D. Flattening Slopes to Eliminate Guardrail

On limited access projects, guardrail may be
eliminated if the fill slopes are flattened to 1:4
or flatter. In order to eliminate guardrail on
free access projects, the fill slope should also
be flattened to 1:4 or flatter, unless additional
R.O.W. would be required. If there are no
obstacles or severe inclined slopes within the
clear zone or at the toe of the fill slope, a 1:3
slope or flatter may then be considered.
E. Length of Barrier at Embankments
(New Construction)
When determining the length of barrier
required to shield an embankment slope (does
not apply to barn roof sections), the designer
must first determine the beginning of the 1:4
slope and where the slope steepens to 1:3.
Using Standard Plan R-59-Series, which
shows flared installations, the limits of the
endings can be determined. Field personnel
should check the length and slope rate of the
fill section and make any necessary
adjustments; sometimes the length will be
adequate, but it may be necessary to "slide"
the barrier one way or the other to fit actual
conditions.
GUARDRAIL AT EMBANKMENTS
(PARALLEL INSTALLATIONS)
HEIGHT OF FILL
AT
1:3 (ft)
LENGTH OF NEED IN
ADVANCE OF
1:3 (ft)
OVER
TO
70 mph 60 mph 50 mph
10
147
121
100
10
12
197
171
122
12
14
235
205
153
14
16
269
238
179
16
18
296
262
198
18
20
316
280
212
20
22
331
294
223
22
24
343
305
231
24
25
349
309
235
ROAD DESIGN MANUAL

ROAD DESIGN
7.01.30 (continued)
7.01.30 (continued)
H. Guardrail Placed near Intersecting

Streets and Driveways
G. Placing Beam Guardrail on a Downslope

Usually the greater the distance from the
roadway that a barrier can be placed, the less
chance there is of it being struck and less
barrier length will be needed to shield the
object. However, placing a barrier on a
downslope close to the shoulder hinge point
(approximately 12'-0" or less) introduces the
potential for the barrier to be less effective
because of the tendency for a vehicle, leaving
the shoulder, to vault over it. The following
guidelines therefore apply:
1. Beam guardrail may be placed on a slope,
beyond the shoulder point, if the slope is
1:10 or flatter.
2. Generally, a 1:10 or flatter slope should
not be constructed specifically to locate
the barrier farther out.
3. Usually, the placement of guardrail on a
1:6 slope is not recommended. There has
been one crash test where guardrail was
placed on a 1:6 slope, 18 feet off the
shoulder point that satisfactorily redirected
a vehicle. However, a flatter slope is more
desirable. The placing of guardrail on 1:6
slopes should be confined to the
applications specified in Section 7.01.32F.
An intersecting street or driveway located near

a roadside object or feature may prevent
installation of the full length of barrier required
along the main road. An example of this would
be a bridge on a main road with an
intersecting driveway located near the bridge.
The preferred solution is to close or relocate
the intersecting street or driveway in order to
install the full length of barrier required along
the main road. A crash cushion or other
impact attenuating devices may be used to
shield a fixed object such as a bridge railing
end, however, this may not provide the length
of need required to shield other roadside
objects or features in the vicinity.
When closing or relocating the intersecting
driveway or street is not feasible, two possible
solutions are given in the accompanying
sketches. A second guardrail run in advance
of the intersecting street or driveway should
be considered when the vehicle's runout path
does not intersect guardrail, or when the
runout path intersects the departing terminal
or the first 12.5 feet of the approach terminal
attached to the curved run of guardrail. See
Special Detail 21 for installing a curved
guardrail run near an intersecting street or
driveway. Also, graphical design methods are
suggested when utilizing the proposed
solutions depicted in the accompanying
sketches.
Site-specific constraints must be taken into
consideration when designing guardrail near
intersecting streets and driveways. Examples
of
these
constraints
include
limited
intersection sight distance, right-of-way
limitations, and the presence of multiple
intersecting driveways in close proximity to
each other. In addition, the use of excessively
short advanced guardrail runs should be
avoided. Questions regarding guardrail
installations near intersecting streets and
driveways should be directed to the Geometric
Design Unit of the Design Division.
ROAD DESIGN MANUAL

ROAD DESIGN
7.01.30 (continued)
ROAD DESIGN MANUAL

ROAD DESIGN
7.01.31 (revised 10-21-2013)
7.01.32 (revised 10-20-2008)
Shielding Bodies of Water
Barrier at Bridge Approaches

(Over and Under)
Warrants for shielding streams or permanent

bodies of water are judgement decisions
based on location and depth of water and
likelihood of encroachment (page 5-9, 2011
AASHTO,
Roadside
Design
Guide).
Streams or permanent bodies of water more
than 2'-0" in depth will usually require
shielding by a barrier if within the clear zone
(page 18, 1977 AASHTO, Guide for
Selecting, Locating and Designing Traffic
Barriers). Barrier may also be required for
bodies of water beyond the clear zone if, in
the judgement of the designer, there is greater
than usual potential for an errant vehicle to
enter the water. An exception may be water
close to the road for a considerable distance
(a causeway is a case in point). In this case,
speeds may have been correspondingly
reduced because the roadside might be
heavily used for recreational access to the
water and for fishing. An intermittent barrier
leaves many exposed endings to treat and
space may not be available for proper flaring
of the ends. After all factors are taken into
consideration, it may be decided that the
disadvantages of a barrier outweigh the
advantages.
Besides shielding embankments, the other

most common use of a roadside barrier is
shielding massive structural components.
These fall into two general categories, the
overpassing structure (approaches and
railings) and the under passing structure
(piers, drainage structures, and abutments).
A. Attachment to Barriers and Closer Post
Spacings
Guardrail beam elements fastened to concrete
structures should overlap the concrete
sufficiently to place the end bolts onto the
concrete a minimum of 3'-6". This distance is
considered necessary to prevent the concrete
from shattering and the bolts from pulling
loose under impact.
All of the guardrail anchorage, bridge
attachments specified on Standard Plans
R-67-Series, B-22-Series and B-23-Series
increase in lateral stiffness. This is done to
keep an impacting vehicle from displacing the
guardrail and pocketing against the rigid
bridge structure. The transition for lateral
stiffness of guardrail is described in Section
7.01.21.
Additionally, Standard Plans
B-22-Series and B-23-Series use heavier 10
gage (0.138") thrie beam elements to increase
barrier strength.
ROAD DESIGN MANUAL

ROAD DESIGN
7.01.32 (continued)
7.01.32 (continued)

(Over and Under)
C. Barrier at the Trailing End of

Overpassing Structures
B.
Standard Plan R-59-Series does not show

guardrail on the trailing end of bridges
carrying one-way traffic. This is because,
assuming a 15 degree angle of departure, an
errant vehicle can be assumed as being in the
area where the "approach" fill slope will be 1:3
or flatter. When a slope steeper than 1:3
occurs, shielding may be required.
Relationships Between Bridge

Sidewalk and Approach Guardrail
If the bridge approaches are continuously

curbed, and the design speed is 40 mph or
higher, place the approach guardrail in
conjunction with the curb as described in
Section 7.01.34. Then carry the rail across
the bridge in line with the approach rail,
affixed to the sidewalk with metal brackets. If
the design speed is 35 mph or less, place the
guardrail in general alignment with the bridge
railing and connected to it.
If the approaches are not curbed, regardless
of traffic speed, place the guardrail at the
edge of shoulder, connected to the bridge
railing.
Where a roadway carries two-way traffic,

approach guardrail is provided because the
departing end for one direction is the
approach end for the other. The designer
should determine if the opposite side railing is
within the clear zone, measured from the
centerline.
If one or more downspout headers are
required on the departing end of a one-way
bridge, it will be necessary to shield it with
guardrail. This guardrail should extend a
minimum length of the Guardrail Departing
Terminal beyond the last downspout header.
When a major railing or bridge reconstruction
project is programmed, existing 12" high
approach curbs on the departing ends of
one-way bridges should be removed and
replaced with a reduced height curb, unless
shielding with guardrail will be required. See
current Standard Plan R-32-Series for Bridge
Approach Curb & Gutter, Detail 1A.
ROAD DESIGN MANUAL

ROAD DESIGN
7.01.32 (continued)
7.01.32 (continued)

(Over and Under)
E. Guardrail Median Object Protection
D. Shielding Requirements at Bridge

Underpasses
The clear zone criteria presented in Section
7.01.11 is the primary source of information
used in determining whether bridge columns
or abutments require shielding. Because a
clear zone distance cannot always be
determined precisely, it may happen that a
fixed object thought to be outside the clear
zone may need shielding. When this occurs,
the designer must determine a method to
shield them. Accepted methods for shielding
are specified on the standard plans. If the
only requirement is to shield the bridge pier or
abutment, the barrier length should be
calculated using the information found in
Section 7.01.05G.
Current bridges are usually designed with
longer spans, so that bridge columns and
abutments can be placed outside the clear
zone. Even when spans are increased, not all
bridge columns and abutments can be located
outside clear zones. An example might be
where a widened clear zone results from a
bridge being located over a curved roadway.
Currently, the approach bridge fill, behind the
abutment, is designed to have a 1:6 slope
facing oncoming traffic on the road below.
However, when the approach slope is not 1:6
or flatter, additional barrier may be required to
obtain the required runout length used in the
above formula.
Standard Plan R-56-Series illustrates an

enclosed guardrail system for shielding
objects such as bridge piers and sign supports
in medians 36 to less than 70 in width. The
system encloses the median objects between
two parallel runs of thrie beam guardrail
converged and terminated at each end with a
Type 3 approach terminal (Standard Plan
R-63-Series). This design replaces the past
versions of Standard Plan R-56-Series
featuring the Minnesota Bullnose design. The
current standard also provides details for a
direct connection to filler walls.
This
connection detail requires construction of
concrete end walls and reduces the overall
guardrail length required.
Standard Plan R-56-Series also details a
treatment for shielding the opening between
twin-bridge approaches. For wider medians at
twin bridge approaches, the guardrail
configuration specified on Standard Plan
R-59-Series should be used.
ROAD DESIGN MANUAL

ROAD DESIGN
7.01.32 (continued)
7.01.33 (revised 10-21-2013)

(Over and Under)
Maintaining Guardrail Strength When

One or More Posts Must Be Omitted
F. Bridge Columns and Foundations in

70 Medians
A. Downspout Headers
Bridge columns and sign support foundations

located in the center of 70 medians were
once considered outside the clear zone.
Shielding is now required and should be
included in any programmed project
upgrading.
The treatment for shielding columns and
foundations for new construction and
reconstruction projects should be according to
the enclosed system designs shown on
Standard Plan R-56-Series, Guardrail Median
Object Protection.
In addition to the enclosed systems discussed
in the previous section, an open system is
detailed in Standard Plan R-56-Series for
other
than
new
construction
and
reconstruction projects with 70 medians and
existing fill slope rates of 1:6 or flatter. This
detail features twin parallel guardrail runs that
shield the median objects independently for
each direction of traffic. This option offers the
advantage
of
better
accessibility
for
maintenance equipment to service the median
or sign foundations. It is intended only for the
conditions stated above.
Standard Plan R-32-Series, under "Notes",

advises field personnel to determine the
location of proposed guardrail posts prior to
locating the spillway or downspout header(s).
If this is done, there will be no conflict. There
are occasions however, when miscalculation
in construction layout or when upgrading
guardrail, that an existing downspout header
will prevent a post from being placed at the
proper spacing. Downspout headers that
were constructed prior to 1970 and according
to Standard Plan E-4-A-144 series, are an
example. These downspouts had deeper
throats and were designed to fit 12'-6" post
spacing. When a post cannot be properly
placed, Standard Plan R-72-Series, "W-Beam
Backed Guardrail Installations" should be
used.
B. Wide Culverts
Maintaining the continuity of the barrier
strength is also necessary when a run of
guardrail spans a wide culvert and the proper
embedment of a guardrail post(s) cannot be
obtained. When the spanning of a wide
culvert requires the omission of one or two
posts, Standard Plan R-72-Series, "W-Beam
backed Guardrail Installations" should be
used. Where no barrier wall exists and the
span is over 18'-9", Standard Plan
R-73-Series, "Guardrail over Box or Slab
Culverts" may be used.
ROAD DESIGN MANUAL

ROAD DESIGN
7.01.33 (continued)
C. Placing Guardrail in Rock
Rock formations, which occur more frequently
in the Upper Peninsula, may prevent the full
embedment of guardrail posts. When only a
partial embedment of posts can be obtained,
backing the guardrail according to the method
illustrated in Standard Plan R-72-Series is an
option to individually drilling each hole. If the
number of post locations in the influence of
the rock formation would force the length of
the backed guardrail section to exceed that
allowed in the standard, the affected posts
holes will have to be drilled. If the depth of
soil overlying the rock formation is 18" or
greater, the hole diameter required for steel
posts is 8" (12" for wood) and full post
embedment depth is required. If the depth of
soil overlying the rock formation is less than
18", the hole diameter required for steel posts
is 21" (23" for wood) and a 24" embedment
depth into the rock is required. A strong-post
W-beam guardrail exhibits better performance
if the post is allowed to rotate in the soil.
Thus, the post should not be placed in the
center of the hole, but at the front, so the
backfill is behind the back of the post. This
work should be included by special provision.
7.01.33 (continued)
ROAD DESIGN MANUAL

ROAD DESIGN
7.01.33 (continued)
7.01.33 (continued)

E. Additional Blockouts on Guardrail Posts
D. Guardrail Posts through Paved

Surfaces
Guardrail posts embedded into paved
surfaces present a problem similar to that of
guardrail posts in rock formations. The paved
surface will not allow the posts to rotate in
their embedment (to distribute vehicle loads
through the post into the embedment material)
prior to breaking. Thus, an area of pavement
around the post know as "leave out" must be
omitted to allow the post to rotate. For both
steel and wood posts, the size of the leave out
should be an area of about 15" x 15" (square
or round). The most critical measurement is
the distance from the back of post to the back
edge of the leave out, which should be a
minimum of 7.
After post installation,
patching material is generally placed around
the guardrail post in the "leave out" area. This
work should be included by special provision.
Double blockouts (16" deep) may be used to

increase the post offset to avoid obstacles
such as curbs. Except at terminals, there is
no limit to the number of posts in a guardrail
run that use double blockouts. Under special
circumstances, one or two posts in a run of
guardrail may employ as many as four
blockouts (up to 36") to provide proper
clearance. There should be no voids between
blockouts when using double or multiple
blockouts. Furthermore, for aesthetic reasons,
double or multiple blockouts should be
installed without creating sudden changes in
guardrail alignment.
When using double or multiple blockouts,
steps must be taken to prevent the placement
of guardrail posts on steep fill slopes beyond
the shoulder hinge point. Placing conventional
length guardrail posts on steep fill slopes may
result in posts having insufficient soil
embedment depth, thereby reducing the
post's strength to resist overturning. See
Section 7.01.41.D, 8'-0" Posts, for guardrail
post length requirements when placing
guardrail at or near the shoulder hinge line.
ROAD DESIGN MANUAL

ROAD DESIGN
7.01.34 (revised 10-21-2013)
Guardrail in Conjunction with Curb
When a vehicle strikes a curb, the trajectory of
that vehicle depends upon several variables
including
the
size
and
suspension
characteristics of the vehicle, its speed and
angle of impact, and the height and shape of
the curb itself. Generally, the use of curb on
high speed roadways (design speed greater
than 50 mph) is discouraged.
If guardrail/curb combinations are used when
design speeds are less than 45 mph, the curb
height should be 6" or less, with the face of
guardrail being located either flush with the
face of curb or at least 8' behind it.
For design speeds of 45 mph or 50 mph, a 6"
curb (or less) may be used if the guardrail is
located flush with the face of curb. If an offset
from the curb is desired, the curb height
should be 4" or less with the guardrail being
located at least 13' behind the curb.
If guardrail/curb combinations are necessary
when the design speed is greater than
50 mph, a mountable curb (Type D curb or
valley gutter) should be used, and the curb
height should be 4" or less, with the face of
guardrail being located flush with the face of
curb. .
When guardrail is located flush with the face
of curb, the rail height should be measured
from the front edge of the gutter pan, which is
the point on the gutter pan that is closest to
the edge of the traveled lane. At greater
distances (typically 8'-0" to 13'-0") the rail
height should be measured from the ground
just in front of the guardrail.
7.01.34 (continued)
ROAD DESIGN MANUAL

ROAD DESIGN
7.01.40
7.01.41 (revised 10-20-2008)
Guard Posts for Roadside Control
Barrier systems should not be used merely for

roadside control. Where it is impractical to
use curb for this purpose, wooden posts
without connecting beam elements will suffice.
These posts should be weakened by adding
two 3 diameter holes, through the 8" face
and 6" apart, with the bottom one about 1"
above the ground. The holes should be
perpendicular to traffic. Posts may be about
5'-0" apart or as necessary to control traffic in
the specific situation. See Standard Plan
R-74-Series.
The upgrading and replacement of existing

guardrail runs is a leading construction item in
Michigan. Two principle reasons for updating
are an obsolete design or because of changed
conditions, e.g., a guardrail made too low by
resurfacing the shoulder.
A. Guidelines for Upgrading or Replacing
Guardrail
1. If entire runs of guardrail must be replaced
because the guardrail is out of
specifications or cannot be adjusted to
meet specifications, then the guardrail
should be replaced following the current
MDOT recommendations as called for in
Section 7.01.12.
2. Height adjustment may be made on
existing guardrail posts that pass a
thorough inspection for soundness.
Existing beam elements should be
evaluated for expected life and may be
used if they meet current design
standards. If the existing guardrail cannot
be made to meet these conditions, then
the entire run should be replaced with new
guardrail using the recommended type
from Section 7.01.12.
ROAD DESIGN MANUAL

ROAD DESIGN
3. When replacement of the existing
guardrail on freeway ramps is necessary,
use Type T. If a continuous guardrail run
is needed up to and along the crossroad,
transition the Type T to Type B at a point
50'-0" minimum from the edge of the
crossroad for a "T" type ramp terminal.
For a continuous run through a free-flow
ramp, transition to Type B opposite the
2'-0" point in the gore. This should be
done at both on and off ramp terminals.
The transition to Type B is to provide as
much sight distance as possible at the
ramp terminals.
4. Height adjustments may be made to
Type T guardrail meeting the conditions
stated in 2 of this section. If the existing
posts are too low to allow the thrie beam
rail to be placed at the proper height, then
new Type T should be installed.
The placing of the upper bolt shall not be
closer than 2" from top of wood or steel
posts. See the following illustrations.
ROAD DESIGN MANUAL

ROAD DESIGN
7.01.41 (continued)
B. Upgrading Guardrail Terminals

A 1999 federal mandate required the
replacement of Breakaway Cable Terminals
(BCT) on 3R projects on the NHS. Along with
a 1995 mandate that required the replacement
of blunt ends and turned down endings, this
expedites the elimination of all guardrail
terminals that do not meet the crash test
criteria of NCHRP Report 350.
BCTs shall be upgraded to current standard
terminals on all 3R projects on the NHS and
all NHS projects that include guardrail work.
See Standard Plans R-61 and R-62-Series for
details of approved terminals. Existing BCTs
on Non-NHS projects that include guardrail
work shall be upgraded to current standard
terminals except existing BCTs on Non-NHS
3R projects will not require replacement if they
are in good condition, properly installed and
preceded by a flared guardrail run. This is
summarized in the following table:
NHS
BCT
Replacement
Policy
Non NHS
New or
Reconstruct
3R
New or
Reconstruct
3R
Guardrail
Work
Included
No
Guardrail
Work
Included
Guardrail
Work
Included
No
Guardrail
Work
Included
Guardrail
Work
Included
No
Guardrail
Work
Included
Guardrail
Work
Included
No
Guardrail
Work
Included
Existing flared
installation.
Upgrade
Upgrade
Upgrade
No
Upgrade
required
No
Upgrade
required
No
Upgrade
required
Upgrade
No
Upgrade
required
Existing non-flared
installation.
Upgrade
Upgrade
Upgrade
No
Upgrade
required
Upgrade
Upgrade
Upgrade
No
Upgrade
required
ROAD DESIGN MANUAL

ROAD DESIGN
E. Allowable Variation from Standard

Height
These guidelines do not apply to Capital

Preventive Maintenance (CPM) projects.
Safety Criteria for CPM projects are covered
under a separate agreement with the FHWA.
Maintenance forces are to replace a damaged
BCT with an approved terminal from Standard
Plan R-61 or R-62-Series.
C. Intermixing Wood and Steel Posts
At the present time, the Standard
Specifications permit the use of either wood or
steel guardrail posts. Both types of posts may
be randomly intermixed in making repairs on
Types A, B, and T guardrail, but, for
appearance,
complete
runs
being
reconstructed should utilize only one type of
post. Wood and steel posts for types BD and
TD cannot be intermixed because of post size.
Posts in terminals shall be the same as those
specified on Standard Plans R-61-Series,
R-62-Series, R-63-Series and R-66-Series.
When the repair of an existing bullnose
installation is necessary, wood posts shall be
used.
D.
8'-0" Posts
Guardrail upgrading on local roads and

trunklines sometimes requires setting the
posts at the shoulder hinge line rather than
2'-0" (shoulder hinge point to front face of
post) onto the shoulder as specified on
Standard Plan R-60-Series. Most of the time
this condition occurs on a fill, which means
that the soil support behind the post will be
reduced because of the close proximity of the
slope. In these cases, 8'-0" long posts should
be specified. If the ground does not fall away
behind the guardrail, then conventional length
posts are sufficient.
When evaluating existing guardrail to

determine upgrading needs, variation from
standard barrier height is a consideration. A
variation of 3" from the standard height is
allowable. This is considered a functional
variation. Closer tolerances are expected for
construction purposes. If an existing guardrail
is of the proper type, and after all phases of
the proposed project are complete, e.g.,
shoulder resurfacing, etc., the guardrail height
should be within this limit. If any work must be
done on it at all, however, then the run should
be brought up to standard. Before allowing
such a run of guardrail to remain untouched, it
should pass a thorough inspection for the
soundness of posts and the expected
remaining life of the beam elements. The
timing of future road improvements should
also be a consideration.
F. Unpainted Corrosion Resistant
Beam Elements
See Section 7.01.14B.
The Engineering
Operations Committee meeting on January
20, 1989 decided that all existing corrosion
resistant,
or
"rusty
steel",
guardrail
encountered
on
proposed
Interstate
resurfacing or reconstruction projects should
be removed and replaced as part of the
project.
On projects involving bridges only, the
nominal provisions of approach guardrail
(guardrail anchorage to bridge and approach
terminal) shall be replaced if the rail elements
are rusty steel. Where guardrail at the bridge
approaches is part of a more extensive
installation, the decision to replace will be
made on the merits of the specific project.
ROAD DESIGN MANUAL

ROAD DESIGN
7.01.41 (continued)
7.01.41 (continued)
I.
G. Thick Shoulder Lifts
Even though Type T (thrie beam) is the

current "standard" guardrail for use on
freeways, Type B or Type C guardrails do not
need to be replaced on freeways, if there are
no physical deficiencies.
Rehabilitation of rural freeways often entails

placing a new concrete pavement on top of
the old, or placing a thick HMA overlay. This
procedure also raises the shoulder elevation,
thus causing the existing guardrail to be too
low.
When this occurs, the designer is
reminded that provisions should be made to
either reconstruct or upgrade the guardrail.
If reconstruction of the guardrail must precede
the pavement lift by a year or so; the designer
may be tempted to call for longer than normal
posts, leaving them with tops protruding so
that they will be long enough to fit the ultimate
installation. This should not be done; crash
test films frequently show the impacting
vehicle laying over on the rail and sliding
along it. Protruding post tops would thus have
a detrimental effect on smooth redirection of
the vehicle.
H. Type A Guardrail Parallel to
Continuous Abutment, Twin
Overpassing Structures
It was our practice for a number of years to
place Type A guardrail in front of the opening
between twin overpassing structures, parallel
to the continuous abutment and about 4'-0" in
back of it. Current standards provide either a
length or a configuration of guardrail that
eliminates the need for this transverse section
of barrier. On an updating project, if this
transverse barrier is still in place and in good
condition, it may be left as a determent to
persons or animals who could accidentally fall
over the backwall. If the condition of the
barrier warrants removal, it should be
removed and not replaced.
Replacing with Thrie Beam Guardrail
7.01.43
Guidelines for Bridge Railing Replacement
and Attached Approach and Trailing
Guardrails
See Chapter 12 of the Bridge Design Manual.
7.01.44 (revised 10-22-99)

A. Guardrail Upgrading Guidelines on
Local Roads (In Conjunction with
Freeway Work)
In conjunction with work programmed on a
freeway, the Department may have occasion
to upgrade guardrail on roads that are under
local jurisdiction. Generally, the guardrail will
be constructed to "trunkline standards" with
respect to the type of guardrail and the type of
ending. Depending on site conditions, the
location and configuration of the guardrail
used on local roads may not necessarily be to
"trunkline standards".
The Department attempts to prevent errant
local road traffic from encroaching on the
freeway and its appurtenances. The following
guidelines have been established for
upgrading guardrail on local roads over and
under freeways.
ROAD DESIGN MANUAL

ROAD DESIGN
4. A typical urban depressed freeway will

generally not require a guardrail
installation or upgrading because the local
street is probably at grade with the service
streets on each side of the freeway and
the bridge railing endings are a short
distance from the edge of the intersecting
service streets. These local streets are
usually curbed and traffic is restricted to
speeds less than 50 mph (usually 25 mph
to 35 mph).
In addition, low crash
frequency and possible obstruction to
vision also works against the use of
guardrail in this situation. This is not to
prohibit the use of a barrier at such
approaches if different circumstances
suggest the need.
1. If the major work is on the crossroad, the

approach guardrail will be upgraded. For
ADT less than 2000 and the operating
speed 50 mph or less, 200' of approach
guardrail can be considered as satisfying
the runout length (LR) from the bridge
railing end, pier or abutment. See table
for runout length (LR) in Section 7.01.19.
If the ADT on the crossroad exceeds
2,000 or the operating speed exceeds
50 mph, the type of guardrail shall be as
specified in Section 7.01.12 and the
lengths computed using the worksheet in
Section 7.01.05F. If the total length of the
existing run is not more than 100' longer
than the computed length, then the entire
run should be constructed. If the run is
considerably longer, then simply connect
the upgraded guardrail to the existing
guardrail at the 200' cut-off point.
2. If the major work is on the freeway, then
no guardrail upgrading need be done on
local roads, over or under, except in
interchange areas.
The limits of
upgrading the guardrail in interchange
areas should be between the crossroad
ramp terminals.
3. When the major work is on the freeway,
upgrading older local road bridge railings
with guardrail retrofits or new railings will
not be required. See Chapter 12 of the
Bridge Design Manual for instructions on
bridge rail upgrading.
B. Cul-de-sacs
Provide 75' of Type A guardrail at cul-de-sacs
when a rural freeway intersects a local road
and no grade separation is provided. See
Section 12.07.03 for a typical cul-de-sac.
Terminal end shoes are placed at each end.
The purpose of this guardrail is to alert the
motorist using the local road that the road is
not continuous.
C. Guardrail at Urban Service Road "T"
It was our practice for many years to place a
short section of guardrail adjacent to the fence
opposite local streets dead-ending into urban
service roads. This guardrail serves very little
purpose because it will not stop a high-speed
vehicle going through the intersection from the
local street, and it is an additional obstacle for
a vehicle to hit while traveling on the service
road. It is therefore being omitted on new
construction. Instead, a directional arrow sign
is usually placed at the fence, and shrubs may
be planted behind the fence to act as a screen
or visual barrier.
ROAD DESIGN MANUAL

ROAD DESIGN
7.01.44 (continued)
7.01.45 (continued)
A. X-Tension / X-MAS
D.
The X-Tension and X-MAS (X-Tension Median

Attenuator System), respectively, are guardrail
terminals manufactured by Barrier Systems (a
Lindsay Corporation company), Vacaville,
California. Both guardrail terminals are NCHRP
350, Test Level 3 compliant. The X-Tension may
be installed as a flared or a tangent guardrail
terminal for ending single-sided guardrail. The
X-MAS is available for terminating double-sided
guardrail.
Cable on Chain Link Fence
Cable on chain link fence consists of attaching

2 steel cables to a chain link fence. This
treatment may be useful in urban freeway
areas where a local street ends at a service
road and where a chain link fence is located
parallel between the freeway and service
road. Its possible use might be at locations
where there is greater than usual potential for
an errant vehicle to go down onto the freeway.
Details are available from the Standards Unit.
7.01.45 (revised 10-21-13)

All the terminals discussed in this section
have been crash tested as recommended by
NCHRP Report 350 and approved by FHWA.
As with all terminals where penetration behind
and beyond the barrier can be expected, a
traversable area, free of fixed objects, is
recommended to aid post-crash vehicle
stability.
Alternative endings should be
considered where restrictive site conditions
exist, such as bi-directional traffic or two-sided
directional traffic, and where the designer is
unable to obtain the required offset, length,
etc.
Note that this is not a comprehensive list of all
alternative barrier end treatments, and future
developments in the roadside safety industry
will likely result in the availability of additional
barrier end treatments. Consult with the
Geometric Design Unit, Design Division, for
additional information regarding alternative
barrier end treatments.
The X-Tension and X-MAS terminals are

non-gating terminals, so the beginning length of
need point starts at the first guardrail post. As a
result, the X-Tension and X-MAS may be
desirable at locations where a redirective,
non-gating guardrail terminal is considered
advantageous due to site-specific conditions.
Detailed information on design, installation, and
maintenance is available from the Geometric
Design Unit, Design Division.
B. X-TENuator
The X-TENuator is an NCHRP 350, Test
Level
3
compliant
crash
cushion
manufactured by Barrier Systems (a Lindsay
Corporation company), Vacaville, California.
The X-TENuator may be used for both
permanent and temporary applications, and
may be used to terminate single-sided
guardrail,
double-sided
guardrail,
and
concrete barriers. The X-TENuator is
approximately 24'-9" long, and requires a
concrete or asphalt base pad for installation.
While the X-TENuator has a relatively low
installation cost compared to other crash
cushions, this device is considered to be a
sacrificial unit that generally requires complete
removal and replacement after a vehicular
impact.
ROAD DESIGN MANUAL

ROAD DESIGN
7.01.45 (continued)
7.01.45 (continued)
D. BEAT-SSCC
The X-TENuator may be desirable for

restrictive site conditions, such as shielding
concrete barrier or bridge railing endings at
locations that prevent the installation of a
traditional guardrail bridge anchorage and
guardrail approach terminal. Designers should
note that the X-TENuator requires 12'-6" of
longitudinal clear space behind the unit on
both sides of the object being shielded in
order for the side panels of the X-TENuator to
slide back and telescope when the unit is
impacted.
The BEAT-SSCC (Box Beam Bursting Energy

Absorbing Terminal Single-Sided Crash
Cushion) is an NCHRP 350, Test Level 3
compliant terminal manufactured by Road
Systems Inc., Big Springs, Texas.
Detailed information on design and installation

is available from the Geometric Design Unit,
Design Division.
C. QuadTrend
The QuadTrend system is a proprietary
terminal manufactured by Energy Absorption
Systems Inc. This device is for one-sided
directional traffic and is intended for shielding
concrete barrier endings, bridge railing
endings, abutments, etc. This device can be
attached directly to a rigid ending without a
guardrail strength transition. Detailed design,
construction and maintenance information is
available from the Geometric Unit, Design
Division.
The BEAT-SSCC may be used for both

permanent and temporary applications, and is
intended for use as a single-sided terminal for
shielding
concrete
barrier,
bridge
abutments/piers, and certain types of bridge
railings. The BEAT-SSCC is available in the
following lengths: 28', 32', 36', 40', and 44'.
The BEAT-SSCC is available with driven
(ground-mounted) posts or with surfacemounted posts for installation on a concrete
surface. While the BEAT-SSCC has a
relatively low installation cost compared to
other crash cushions, this device is
considered to be a sacrificial unit that
generally requires complete removal and
replacement after a vehicular impact.
The BEAT-SSCC may be desirable for
restrictive site conditions, such as shielding
concrete barrier or bridge railing endings at
locations that prevent the installation of a
traditional guardrail bridge anchorage and
guardrail approach terminal.
Detailed information on design and installation
is available from the Geometric Design Unit,
Design Division.
ROAD DESIGN MANUAL

ROAD DESIGN
7.01.50 (revised 10-20-2008)
Temporary Beam Guardrail
Temporary beam guardrail consists of a
W-beam attached directly to posts at 12'-6"
spacing. Materials, including posts, may be of
salvaged origin, and removal is included in the
pay item. It is used on construction projects
where traffic is maintained along the existing
road. While temporary concrete barrier is now
used to a great extent, temporary guardrail
only costs about half as much and is more
conveniently available in the northern outstate
area. Temporary beam guardrail is called for
on plans when so requested by the
Region/TSC. Specific locations are seldom
shown on plans, but a lump sum quantity is
shown for the entire project on the Note
Sheet, as follows:
Guardrail, Type __, Temp ___ ft
(To be used to protect traffic
as directed by the Engineer)
Do not estimate less than 200' total for a
project, in order to avoid a very small quantity
and an exorbitant unit price.
Temporary beam guardrail usually is not
placed less than 6'-0" from the edge of
traffic-carrying lanes. It may be used in areas
where the pavement is located 20'-0" or less
from the edge of excavations that exceed 5'-0"
in depth, and which have a vertical face or
slope of 1:2 or steeper.
If possible, endings of Temporary Beam
Guardrail should be curved away from traffic,
much like temporary concrete barrier.
ROAD DESIGN MANUAL

ROAD DESIGN
7.01.54 (revised 10-21-2013)
7.01.54 (continued)
Warrants for Median Barriers on Freeways
and costs the least to install and maintain.

Section 5.2 of the 2011 AASHTO Roadside
Design Guide summarizes the major factors
which should be considered before making a
final selection. The current median barrier
warrants formulated for placing barrier in
freeway medians were developed by the
former Traffic and Safety Division, accepted
by the Barrier Advisory Committee and
approved by the Engineering Operations
Committee at their February 4, 1992 meeting.
The warrant table is shown below:
Double thrie and double W-beam steel

guardrail (semi-rigid), concrete median barrier
(rigid) and Cable (Flexible) are considered
equally suitable for reducing cross-median
crashes. However, each has its application
and each has its advantages and
disadvantages.
The designer should be
knowledgeable of these when making
decisions relative to which type of barrier to
call for. The most desirable system is the one
that satisfies the performance requirement
ROAD DESIGN MANUAL

ROAD DESIGN
7.01.55 (revised 10-21-2013)
7.01.55 (continued)
Median Barrier Types
B. Double Steel Beam Guardrail
Median barriers, when used, are employed

almost exclusively on controlled access
highways. If the road is free access, openings
would have to be provided at intersections
and crossovers. This means that the barrier
must be terminated at these points with a
crash worthy end treatment. The lengths of
the end treatments must be added to the
length of the opening thus increasing the
length of unprotected median, as the end
treatments provide only marginal median
crossover protection.
Advantages
Generally, the initial installation cost of

concrete median barrier is about 10-15%
more than a double-sided metal guardrail.
(However, this comparison does not include
the possible additional cost of drainage
alterations, etc., that might be required in
conjunction
with
concrete
barrier.)
Advantages and disadvantages for the three
barrier systems are as follows:
A. Concrete Median Barrier
1. May be used in the wider medians

(median width not a factor)
2. Less snow fence effect than concrete
barrier
3. Lateral drainage can flow under
4. Performs better than concrete barrier for
high angle impacts
Disadvantages:
1. Maintenance repair usually required after
a hit
2. Harder to install in rock
3. No durable glare screen available for
mounting on top
C. Cable Barrier
General Guidelines
Advantages
1. Very low maintenance.
2. Relatively good visibility.
3. Less vehicle damage at low angles of
impact.
4. Easier on which to affix glare screen
(glare screen can be integrally cast)

Disadvantages:
1. Greater snow fence effect (wind cannot
pass through)
2. Traps blowing paper and trash
3. Usually requires some form of internal
drainage
Cable median barrier is recommended on

divided roadways where:
1. Median crossover crashes have been
reported, and
2. Median barrier is not warranted based
on Section 7.01.54 of the Michigan
Road Design Manual.
Median width should be a minimum of 30
feet.
Median slopes shall be 1:4 or flatter.
The cable barrier shall be placed at a
location that permits the system to deflect
unimpeded during a vehicular impact. The
cable barrier shall not interfere with
opposing traffic or other roadside objects
during a vehicular impact. If a single run
of cable barrier cannot satisfy the offset
requirements, dual runs should be used.
At locations where both NCHRP 350, TL-3
and TL-4 cable systems may be installed,
NCHRP 350, TL-4 cable systems are
preferred.
ROAD DESIGN MANUAL

ROAD DESIGN
Table 1:
The length of need (LON) for cable

median barrier is based on engineering
judgment. Consult with the Geometric Unit
of the Design Division for additional
information.
Due to the advantages high-tension cable
systems possess, high-tension cable
systems are preferred over low-tension
cable systems.
Approved Cable Median Barrier Systems

The following cable barrier systems are
approved for use as median barrier.
Questions regarding cable median barriers
should be directed to the Geometric Unit of
the Design Division.
DESIGN CRITERIA FOR

LOW-TENSION THREE-CABLE MEDIAN BARRIER
Maximum Flare Rate
4:1
Minimum Design
Deflection Distance
16 feet
Minimum Offset
Between Median
Ditch Line and
Cable Barrier
(Single Runs Only)
8 feet
Maximum Length
Between Terminals
2,000 feet
A. Low-Tension
Three-Cable
Median
Barrier (Type M Cable Barrier per
Standard Plan R-70-Series)
This is a non-proprietary cable system that is
described in the 2011 AASHTO Roadside
Design Guide and MDOT Standard Plan
R-70-Series. This design has been adopted
by various agencies throughout the nation.
The cable system and the end terminals have
been successfully tested to NCHRP 350,
TL-3.
Advantages:
1. Non-proprietary, usually less expensive
than proprietary items
2. May be used on curved roadways with
radii as low as 110 feet
Disadvantages:
1. Generally requires more maintenance
than high-tension cable systems
2. System is usually inoperative after an
impact (i.e., requires immediate inspection
and maintenance after an impact)
3. Larger impact deflection compared to
high-tension cable systems
4. Maximum length between terminals is
considerably smaller than high-tension
cable systems
Post Spacing
and
Roadway Curvature
Requirements
RADIUS
POST SPACING
Less than
110 feet
CABLE BARRIER
NOT
RECOMMENDED
110 feet
to
219 feet
6-0
220 feet
to
699 feet
12-0
700 feet
or more
and
Tangent
Sections
16-0
ROAD DESIGN MANUAL

ROAD DESIGN
The Gibraltar cable system is available in both

NCHRP 350, TL-3 and NCHRP 350, TL-4
versions rated for 1:6 slopes or flatter.
Gibraltar also manufactures an NCHRP 350,
TL-3 cable system rated for 1:4 slopes or
flatter. In addition, the Gibraltar cable terminal
is an NCHRP 350, TL-3 compliant end
terminal for use with the Gibraltar cable
system.
B. High-Tension Cable Median Barrier

CASS Cable System
The CASS cable system is a proprietary,
high-tension cable barrier manufactured by
Trinity Industries, Inc. The system is available
with either C-shaped or I-shaped steel posts,
driven into the ground or installed in concrete
post foundations with a sleeve of steel.
I-shaped steel posts can be spaced farther
apart than C-shaped posts, thereby requiring
fewer posts and lowering the overall
installation cost. However, it is necessary to
use C-shaped posts along curved roadways
with radii less than 1,300 feet. C-shaped and
I-shaped steel posts may not be intermixed on
an individual run of cable barrier.
Three diameter pre-stretched cables are
placed in a slot at the top of the post and kept
apart by spacers of recycled plastic. The
cables are tensioned according to cable
temperature.
The CASS cable system is available in both
versions rated for 1:6 slopes or flatter. CASS
is also available in an NCHRP 350, TL-3
version rated for 1:4 slopes or flatter. In
addition, the CASS cable terminal (CCT) is an
NCHRP 350, TL-3 compliant end terminal for
use with the CASS cable system.
Gibraltar Cable System
The Gibraltar cable system is a proprietary,
Gibraltar Cable Barrier Systems, LP. The
system consists of steel posts, driven into the
ground or installed in concrete post
foundations with a sleeve of steel. Gibraltar
manufactures both three-cable and four-cable
systems. diameter prestretched cables are
attached to the posts and kept at the
appropriate height by devices called
"hairpins," which are unique to Gibraltar. The
cables are tensioned according to cable
temperature.
Brifen Cable System

The Brifen cable system is a proprietary,
Brifen USA, Inc. The system consists of steel
posts, driven into the ground or installed in
concrete post foundations with a sleeve of
steel, and four pre-stretched cables. Three
of the four cables are woven on alternating
sides of sequential posts over the entire
segment length. The cables are tensioned
according to cable temperature.
The Brifen cable system is available in both
versions rated for 1:6 slopes or flatter. Brifen
is also available in an NCHRP 350, TL-3
version rated for 1:4 slopes or flatter. In
addition, the Brifen WRGT end terminal is an
use with the Brifen cable system.
Safence Cable System
The Safence cable system is a proprietary,
Safence, Inc. The system consists of steel
posts, driven into the ground or installed in
concrete post foundations with a sleeve of
steel. Safence manufactures both three-cable
and four-cable systems. diameter prestretched cables are placed in a slot at the top
of the post and kept apart by spacers of
recycled plastic. The cables are tensioned
according to cable temperature.
The Safence cable system is available in both
versions rated for 1:6 slopes or flatter. In
addition, the Safence cable terminal is an
use with the Safence cable system.
ROAD DESIGN MANUAL

ROAD DESIGN

Table 2:
Advantages:
1. Typically impact deflection is 10 feet or
less
2. Generally requires less maintenance than
low-tension cable systems
3. Compared to low-tension cable barrier,
high-tension cable barrier has a much
higher probability of remaining operative
after an impact
Disadvantages:
1. Systems are proprietary; more expensive
than low-tension cable systems
2. System may be inoperative after an
impact (i.e., usually requires immediate
inspection and maintenance after an
impact)
3. System is limited to curved roadways with
radii of 650 feet and greater
DESIGN CRITERIA FOR

HIGH-TENSION CABLE MEDIAN BARRIER
Maximum Flare Rate
30:1
Minimum Design
Deflection Distance
12 feet
Minimum Offset
Between
Median Ditch Line
and Cable Barrier
(Single Runs Only)
10 feet
Maximum Length
Between Terminals
26,400 feet
(5 miles)
Post Spacing
and
Roadway Curvature
Requirements
RADIUS
POST SPACING
Less than
650 feet
CABLE BARRIER
NOT
RECOMMENDED
650 feet
See Manufacturers
and
Specifications
greater
ROAD DESIGN MANUAL

ROAD DESIGN
ROAD DESIGN MANUAL

ROAD DESIGN
ROAD DESIGN MANUAL

ROAD DESIGN
ROAD DESIGN MANUAL

ROAD DESIGN
ROAD DESIGN MANUAL

ROAD DESIGN
ROAD DESIGN MANUAL

ROAD DESIGN
ROAD DESIGN MANUAL

ROAD DESIGN
ROAD DESIGN MANUAL

ROAD DESIGN
ROAD DESIGN MANUAL

ROAD DESIGN
ROAD DESIGN MANUAL

ROAD DESIGN
ROAD DESIGN MANUAL

ROAD DESIGN
7.01.56 (revised 6-7-2000)
Concrete Median Barriers
A. GM Shape
The first concrete barrier shape used in
Michigan was developed by General Motors.
Sections of the GM barrier shape still remain
in use, but is no longer being built on new
construction projects. It was replaced by the
New Jersey shape on Standard Plan II-49D in
1976.
The key design parameter for a safety shape
barrier is the distance from the ground to the
slope break point because this determines
how much the vehicle suspension will be
compressed. The higher slope break (1'-1") of
the GM shape causes less sheet metal
damage, but it has more potential for an
impacting vehicle to ride up on the barrier.
There would be nothing wrong with a
vertical-faced barrier except that the slightest
vehicle contact will result in sheet metal
damage. A vertical wall, of course, is more
difficult to construct if slip-form methods are
used.
At its June 2, 2000 meeting, the Engineering
Operations
Committee
approved
a
Department policy that calls for replacement
of existing GM barrier as warranted by the
condition of the existing barrier and crash
history.
B. New Jersey Shape
The New Jersey shape is Michigan's current
standard shape. It has a 3" high vertical face
at the toe. This is an allowance for future
resurfacing. The 10" radius at the change in
vertical slope has no safety purpose; it is for
aesthetic purposes only. The standard 10"
top width was determined as necessary to
provide the same overturning moment as the
previously used G.M. barrier, and to reduce
the probability of fracture under heavy impact.
It should be emphasized that the New Jersey
shaped barrier should not be built with a 6"
top width and, in fact, has never been
standard in Michigan.
7.01.56 (continued)
ROAD DESIGN MANUAL

ROAD DESIGN
7.01.56 (continued)
7.01.56 (continued)
Concrete Median Barriers

C. Innovative Concrete Median Barriers
The Intermodal Surface Transportation
Efficiency Act of 1991 (ISTEA) required that
each State Transportation Agency construct
innovative median barrier (IMB) amounting to
at least 2 percent of their total yearly
installation for each of the next six calendar
years. Shown below and on the right side of
this page are two concrete median barriers
used in Michigan that FHWA approved as
qualified IMB.
7.01.57 (revised 10-22-99)

Concrete barrier normally can be ended by
attaching a combination of a bridge guardrail
anchorage (Standard Plan R-67-Series),
conventional guardrail, and a guardrail
approach terminal (see Standard Plans R-61
& R-62-Series).
The same criteria for
calculating the length of need should be used
with the concrete barrier included in the length
of need. The minimum length of anchorage
and ending guardrail are specified on
Standard Plan R-54-Series.
In the case of ending a concrete median
barrier, the approach side can be ended with
guardrail as long as the barrier is ended with
all portions of the barrier system being located
outside the clear zone area for the opposing
traffic.
Where the minimum length and lateral
clearance cannot be obtained, a more
expensive alternative for ending the concrete
barrier would be to use a QuadTrend system
or some type of impact attenuator. (See
Sections 7.01.45C and 7.02.)
ROAD DESIGN MANUAL

ROAD DESIGN
7.01.58 (revised 10-22-99)
7.01.60 (continued)
Two Types of Concrete Median Barrier

Footings
2. Is the median ditch shallow enough and

the slopes gentle enough to permit safe
traversal? If the open ditch must be filled
in and enclosed drainage provided, then
the
median
must
be
completely
reconstructed.
Designers should note that the standard plan

for concrete median barrier (R-49-Series)
specifies a Type A and a Type B. Type A has
an integrally cast footing whereas Type B is
doweled to a separately cast footing or
concrete shoulder. When Type A barrier is
called for on the plans the contractor has the
option of casting the base integrally with
footing or constructing the barrier in the same
manner as Type B without any extra payment.
Type B is payment for the upper portion of the
barrier and is doweled onto an existing
separately cast footing or concrete shoulder.
If the designer wants to designate that the
barrier be cast on a separate footing, they
should note this on the plans or in a special
provision, but still pay for it as Type A barrier.
7.01.59 (revised 10-22-99)

Concrete glare screen, as opposed to glare
screen made of other materials, is now used
exclusively in Michigan when a glare screen is
needed in conjunction with a concrete median
barrier. Glare screen is called for routinely
whenever the concrete median barrier is on a
curve and whenever the concrete median
barrier is used on new urban type
construction. See Section 7.03.
3. If enclosed drainage is decided upon, are

roadway grades sufficient to drain surface
water?
When flat (0 - 0.1%) grades are encountered,
it may be necessary to use metal slotted drain
adjacent to concrete median barrier. When
slotted drain is used, only about 50% of the
length of flat grade actually needs the slotted
drain (placed intermittently).
7.01.65 (revised 10-20-2008)

Concrete Median Barrier Between
Roadways of Different Elevations
Superelevation on divided highways may
cause the median shoulders to be at different
elevations. When this occurs, one side will be
higher than normal resulting in the median
barrier being asymmetrical. The barrier must
be specially detailed on the plans. The New
Jersey shape should be used, and the high
side should be created by extending the upper
slope as high as necessary to match the
other, normal, side. The plans should not
refer to the New Jersey shape as such, except
in the context that it is modified.
7.01.60
Retrofitting Concrete Median Barrier
It is usually difficult and costly constructing a
concrete median barrier where no median
barrier had existed previously and especially
where the median is drained by open ditch.
Factors which the designer must consider are:
1. Where will the median barrier be placed?
If located at the center of the median, the
clear recovery area remaining is equal for
both roadways; if constructed adjacent to
one shoulder, recovery area is unequal for
the two directions.
A 2'-0" difference in elevation is about the

maximum that would allow the barrier to be
slip-formed in one pass. It greatly assists
construction personnel and the contractor if
the plans show surface elevations at the toe of
the barrier.
Shown on the next page is a typical example
of such a median barrier, used on I-696. Note
that the axis is vertical, rather than
perpendicular to the plane of the shoulders.
ROAD DESIGN MANUAL

ROAD DESIGN
7.01.65 (continued)
Concrete Median Barrier Between
Roadways of Different Elevations
ROAD DESIGN MANUAL

ROAD DESIGN
7.01.66 (revised 10-21-2013)
7.01.67 (revised 10-21-2013)
Concrete Barrier, Single Face
Temporary Barrier
Single face concrete barrier was developed to

shield roadside objects or features from one
side only. One such situation is found on
depressed expressways, where the right side
approaches to bridge piers need shielding
from only one side. The Metro Region favors
the use of a concrete barrier over the use of
steel beam guardrail in these locations. The
major justification for its use is the virtual
absence of the need for maintenance. The
results are less exposure to risk for
maintenance personnel and the elimination of
a damaged system being exposed to the
motoring public between an impact and the
completed repair.
Temporary barrier was introduced in Michigan

about 1972. Since that time, its use in
construction work zones has steadily
increased. Temporary barrier serves a dual
purpose: it shields objects originating from
construction
practices
and
protects
construction and maintenance personnel from
the adjacent moving traffic.
If the normal width shoulder can be

maintained and a concrete barrier safety
shape is needed, it should be placed in front
of the underpass bridge piers. Otherwise the
concrete safety shape should be transitioned
to the vertical face of the pier column as
specified on Standard Plan R-54-Series.
Because single face concrete barrier is most
commonly used on urban depressed
expressways, the approach ending is usually
buried in the adjacent cut slope.
See
Standard Plan R-54-Series. If the approach
end cannot be buried in a backslope, it should
be shielded with a minimum of a Guardrail
Anchorage, Bridge and a guardrail approach
terminal.
The use of single face concrete barrier will
usually be requested at the plan review
meeting and will usually be restricted to the
depressed urban freeway situation. Its use in
rural areas is generally discouraged because
of the cost factor, the "snow fence" effect, and
drainage problems created by concentrating
runoff at one or few locations on high fills.
However, the single face concrete safety
shape might be considered between two
consecutive bridges having safety shape
concrete railings that are approximately 200'
apart or less.
Barrier sections were initially precast. Then, a

cast-in-place or slip-formed barrier similar to
permanent barrier was allowed.
Current
designs meeting NCHRP 350 / MASH criteria
are now required.
When computing quantities of temporary
barrier, the designer should review the staging
plans and determine the maximum length of
barrier required at any one time on the project.
If the staging requires that barrier units be
moved, additional pay items and quantities
either for adjusting or relocating are
necessary. Generally, the pay item "Conc
Barrier, Temp, Adj" is used for moving the
barrier laterally to a new alignment on the
same roadbed and "Conc Barrier, Temp,
Relocated" is used for relocating the barrier
longitudinally on the same roadbed, or to
another roadbed. See current specifications
for exact methods of payment.
ROAD DESIGN MANUAL

ROAD DESIGN
7.01.68 (revised 2-27-2012)
7.01.70 (revised 10-22-99)
Ending Temporary Concrete Barrier
Temporary Concrete Barrier Adjacent to a

Precipitous Drop-off
The methods for ending temporary barrier are

specified on Standard Plan R-126-Series.
7.01.69 (revised 3-23-2010)

Temporary Concrete Barrier at Bridge
Deck and Railing Reconstruction
Temporary concrete barrier is frequently used
on bridge railing replacement projects. Its
use, however, is not feasible if it results in
lane widths of less than 10'-0", nor if the
duration of need is short. In the latter event,
alternatives are plastic drums, traffic signals at
each end of the work site, or a detour. It may
be noted that use of concrete barrier on a
bridge produces three points of constriction at
about the same location: a narrower shoulder,
introduction of the bridge railing, and the
funneling down created by the barrier itself. If
possible, it is better if these constrictions and
driver decision points can be spread out along
the approach roadway.
Bridge deck reconstruction usually requires
more work area than bridge railing
reconstruction, and will frequently result in
bi-directional traffic control on a single lane.
Temporary concrete barrier is commonly used
in this application and a detail showing
placement is specified on Standard Plan
R-126-Series. Maintaining traffic provisions
should be included in the plans.
There
are
occasions,
notably
when
reconstructing a bridge by part width, when
maintaining traffic constraints will force the
placement of temporary concrete barrier
immediately adjacent to a precipitous drop-off
situation. This creates a potential for the line
of barrier to be displaced under impact, when
there may be no room available for
displacement. When this condition occurs,
special measures may be needed to ensure
that the barrier will not be so displaced. When
less than 4'-0" is available between the toe of
the barrier on the traffic side and the drop-off,
one of the following measures, listed in order
of preference should be used:
1. Cast a continuous slip-formed barrier,
steel reinforced.
2. If the barrier is to be placed on an existing
concrete deck that will eventually be
removed anyway, drill two holes large
enough for 1" diameter steel dowels or
pegs to be inserted into the lower sloping
portion of each barrier section near each
end on the traffic side of the barrier and
continuing into the concrete below. These
dowels should extend 6" into the deck,
and at least 4" into the barrier, (but not
protrude above the barrier surface) and be
grouted, to prevent both sliding and
overturning of the barrier section.
3. In the case of new work, a variation of
option 2 above might involve casting some
type of anchor that can be cut off flush
later.
4. Other treatments may be submitted to the
Barrier Advisory Committee for approval.
If the designer has a choice, removal limits
should be selected so as to maximize and
equalize available width for the traffic lanes
and barrier.
ROAD DESIGN MANUAL

ROAD DESIGN
7.01.75 (revised 5-7-2001)
7.01.75 (continued)
Concrete Filler Walls
In the past, there have been occasional

attempts to cast a concrete safety shape into
the filler wall in the area of the pier. This
usually results in a concrete "toe" being
placed, having the 55 degree slope of the
safety shape, but the wall being vertical, like
the conventional filler wall. It seems to work
out better to simply transition the approach
barrier system into the vertical face of the filler
wall, and not try to cast a semblance of a
safety shape that will only break away from
the remainder of the structure over time.
Concrete filler walls between pier columns

serve as a continuous barrier to prevent an
impacting vehicle from snagging on the pier
columns. They are used when the shoulder
width does not allow the approach barrier
system to be carried under the structure at the
normal offset from the edge of pavement.
When filler walls are used, the approach
barrier system, if non-rigid, should be
anchored to the filler wall. See Standard
Plans R-55-Series and R-67-Series.
Concrete filler walls constructed between
about 1976 and 1982 were 33" high. The
height was increased in June 1983 to 42" to
allow for future heavy resurfacing. Some
difficulty is being experienced connecting the
current thrie beam guardrail anchorage to
these older 33" high filler walls if there has
been (or will be) a thick-lift resurfacing. When
this occurs, provide for a filler wall extension
with a minimum height of 1'-8" reinforced, and
adhesive anchored to the existing filler wall
with steel bars. Use horizontal sleeves in the
new concrete for the guardrail attachment
bolts. The approach guardrail should be
aligned to allow the holes that must be drilled
into the existing filler wall to be as far from the
top edge as possible, to lessen the possibility
of spalling during the drilling operation.
Sometimes the toe header for the bridge slope
paving is behind the pier columns. This
condition should be noted at the plan review
meeting. When it occurs, a separate footing
must be provided for the filler wall.
The top of the filler wall should be constructed

parallel with the grade of the road, rather than
level. This gives the top lines of the approach
barrier and filler wall a continuous
appearance. Even though the angle between
the vertical columns and the top of the filler
wall will be something other than 90 degrees,
its appearance will be less noticeable.
A filler wall end block shall be constructed
when the connecting guardrail anchorage has
one or more of the posts that can not be
installed full depth.
See Standard Plan
R-55-Series.
ROAD DESIGN MANUAL

ROAD DESIGN
7.02 (1-14-2013)
IMPACT ATTENUATORS
Questions regarding impact attenuators
should be directed to the Geometric Unit of
the Design Division.
ROAD DESIGN MANUAL

ROAD DESIGN
7.03
7.03.02 (continued)
GLARE SCREEN
Concrete glare screen came into use in

Michigan in 1973 as an "add on" to previously
placed concrete median barrier.
It soon
became apparent that it was an economical,
almost maintenance-free structure that, by
comparison, ruled out further consideration of
the other glare screen materials and designs.
As techniques developed for slip-forming
higher and almost vertical concrete walls,
Standard Plan III-76D came out in 1978
requiring that, whenever glare screen was to
be constructed in conjunction with a concrete
median barrier, the wall must be cast
monolithically, 51" high. Not only does this
requirement achieve economy of construction,
it lends strength and additional height to the
concrete barrier as well. If concrete glare
screen has a disadvantage, it is because it
cannot be used in conjunction with steel beam
guardrail.
7.03.01
References
A. Standard Plan R-76-Series,

7.03.02 (revised 10-22-99)

General
Glare screen was first used on median
barriers within the limits of curves, where the
headlight glare from vehicles rounding the
curve would be momentarily aimed directly at
on-coming vehicles in the opposite roadway.
Various materials were tried, with expanded
metal mesh finding favor in Michigan.
Expanded metal mesh, while effective as a
glare screen, is fragile and susceptible to
damage by vehicle contact, fatigue, corrosion
and wind. It thus requires almost constant
maintenance. Its principal advantage is that it
can be rather easily mounted on metal beam
guardrail.
To overcome the shortcoming of expanded
metal mesh, plastic paddles, or "Glarefoils",
were developed around 1976. Varying in
height from about 2'-0" to 4'-0" and made of
polyethylene, they are fastened to metal
brackets attached to concrete median barrier.
Of hollow, oval cross-section, they are
oriented at 45o to the line of barrier in such a
manner that the line of sight is screened
between the opposing directions of traffic, yet
wind currents can pass through. Michigan's
experience with plastic paddles has been
mixed; they are more durable than expanded
metal mesh, but they still require considerable
maintenance.
Plastic paddles may be
considered if a temporary glare screen is
required on temporary concrete median
barrier, but we currently do not consider it for
permanent installation.
7.03.03 (revised 12-22-2011)

Criterion for Use
It is current practice to place concrete glare
screen on concrete median barrier whenever
new concrete median barrier is constructed in
urban areas. In rural areas the use of a glare
screen will be as recommended on a
project-by-project basis by the Geometric Unit,
Design Division. (The terms "urban" and
"rural" here refer to the characteristics of
surrounding development, not the relationship
of the project to city limit signs.)
ROAD DESIGN MANUAL

ROAD DESIGN
7.04
7.04.02 (continued)
PAVEMENT MARKINGS
Temporary Raised
Pavement Markers
(TRPM)
consist
of
either
flexible
retro-reflective strips (with or without a plastic
shield) or a solid plastic device with a
retro-reflective face. Types of TRPMs and
their applications are listed in section 812 of
the current Standard Specifications for
Construction.
7.04.01 (revised 10-22-99)

General
Pavement markings, both permanent and
temporary, are included in the contracts of
virtually every project in the lower peninsula
and about half of those in the upper peninsula.
The inclusion of pavement markings on the
remaining projects will be determined by the
Region/TSC. The only type of project not
requiring the pavement markings to be
included (either by contract or by work order)
are where the existing markings are not
altered or obliterated.
7.04.03 (revised 10-22-99)

Pavement Marking Quantities
7.04.02 (revised 10-20-2008)
The Region/TSC Traffic and Safety Engineer

will usually furnish Design quantities of each
type of pavement marking required for the
project. These quantities are normally given
after the Plan Review Meeting and may be
near design completion. If the pavement
marking is complicated, a pavement marking
layout sheet(s) should be included in the
plans. The quantities are typically shown
under "Miscellaneous Quantities" on the Note
Sheet.
Temporary Pavement Markings
7.04.04
Temporary pavement markings usually

consist of 4" wide strips of reflectorized, white
or yellow, adhesive-backed tape, 4'-0" long
with 46' gaps.
There are two types
designated in the pay items, "R" and "NR,"
standing for Removable and Non-Removable.
Temporary markings must be removable if
they are applied to the ultimate pavement
surface; they need not be removed if they are
applied to a lower course of HMA pavement
that will be covered by another course of
material.
Removing Permanent Pavement Markings
When there are no construction projects

scheduled, annual pavement marking is
accomplished through region-wide contracts
or by state forces.
Reflectorized tape does not adhere well to

rough surfaces, such as seal coats or an
open-graded HMA mat. Paint is used in these
cases to replace the reflectorized tape. If
paint is used for temporary marking, the pay
item should reflect the word "temporary," e.g.,
"Pavt Mrkg, Type NR, Paint, 4 inch (color),
Temp."
Inappropriate permanent pavement markings

must be removed before any change is made
in traffic patterns. This may be done using air
or water blasting, sand blasting, grinding,
scraping, or chemicals. Painting over is not
considered to meet the requirements for
removal. Payment for removing pavement
markings, when necessary, will only be made
for Type NR markings.
7.04.05
Statutory Participating Cities
Statutory participating cities are exempt from
participating in the cost of permanent
pavement markings.
ROAD DESIGN MANUAL

ROAD DESIGN
7.04.06 (added 4-22-2013)
Witness, Log and Layout
Most projects call for the placement and/or
replacement
of
permanent
pavement
markings. To ensure the markings are laid
out properly the Designer must include
information in the plans or proposal to allow a
Contractor to do so.
Markings are placed or replaced using one or
a combination of the following methods:
A log of previously witnessed

markings
Pavement marking plan sheets
Reference to standard plans (only if
the standard can be placed in the
field)
When there is a need for the Contractor to

witness and log any existing pavement
markings, the pay item Witness, Log, Layout,
$1,000.00, must be included in the contract.
This item must be used when any portion of
the pavement markings must be witnessed
and logged by the Contractor or SubContractor prior to the pavement being
removed.
ROAD DESIGN MANUAL

ROAD DESIGN
7.05
7.05.01 (continued)
TRAFFIC SIGNS AND

ROADWAY DELINEATORS
As mentioned above, signing plans will

generally be prepared by the Design Division
Traffic Sign Unit or Region/TSC Traffic &
Safety. There may be occasions, however,
where time constraints will necessitate Design
completing the final drafting of signing plans
from preliminary layouts furnished by the
Region/TSC.
Design should contact the
Reflective Systems Unit, if the Region/TSC
has not submitted special provisions and
support standards with plans. The role that
the Traffic Sign Unit, plays is one of review
and coordination between the Region/TSC
and Design.
7.05.01 (revised 12-22-2011)

Traffic Signs
The Department has jurisdiction over traffic
operational signs (As opposed to local street
name signs which are the property and
responsibility of the local jurisdiction, and
occupy the R.O.W. by permission).
The
responsibility for preparing any required
freeway signing plans will be that of the
Design Division Traffic Sign Unit and/or its
traffic signing consultant. The preparation of
signing plans for non-freeway is the
responsibility of the Region/TSC or a
per-qualified signing consult.
Design's
responsibility will usually be limited to
coordinating the signing plans with the project
plans.
When a project involves completely new
construction or reconstruction, the signing
plans should be included as part of the project
plans. If the project will be built under one
contract, e.g., a two-lane, free access
roadway, then the signing will be included with
the road plans either as plan sheets or
computerized log sheets. If a contiguous
section of freeway is being built under several
contracts, it is possible that the signing work
will be done with a separate contract. Even if
this happens, some foundation and sign base
work may be included in the road and bridge
contracts. The Design Unit should contact the
Region/TSC Operations Engineer early in the
project development stage to determine if
signing will be a part of the project. Also a
copy of the correspondence should be given
to Design Division Traffic Sign Unit. If the
signing contract is being done with a separate
contract, the Design Unit should also contact
the Traffic Sign Unit to confirm that all items
are included in their respective contracts.
Salvaged signs remain the property of the

Department and components will be re-used,
whenever possible, by Maintenance and the
sign shops.
For signing on detours see Section 12.05.
7.05.02 (revised 10-22-2014)

Delineators
See Standard Plan R-127-Series, "Delineator
Installations" for information on both rigid-post
and flexible-post delineators.
The contract items of Delineator Reflector,
Post, Delineator,
and/or
Delineator,
Reflective Sheeting, and Post, Flexible
Delineator shall be used on all 3R/4R road
construction projects for divided highways and
freeways. Inclusion of these items should also
be considered on divided highway and
freeway CPM projects depending on the
condition of existing devices and the
pavement remaining service life.
The rigid delineator measurements and
payments are for Delineator Reflector,
measured as "each" (Delineator ReflectorDouble is counted as two each) and Post,
Delineator, also measured as each.
ROAD DESIGN MANUAL

ROAD DESIGN
7.05.02 (continued)
Delineators
The designer should make an estimate of
each type of Delineator reflector, based on the
patterns specified on the standard plan.
These quantities are shown in the
Miscellaneous Estimate on the plans, as
follows:
Delineator Reflector - Single Crystal
Delineator Reflector - Single Yellow
Delineator Reflector - Single Green
Delineator Reflector - Double Crystal
Delineator Reflector - Double Yellow
Delineator Reflector - Single Crystal with Red
Delineator Reflector - Single Yellow with Red
DELINEATOR REFLECTOR TOTAL
(
(
(
(
) Double
) Double
) Double
) Double
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
) Each
) Each
) Each
) Each
) Each
) Each
) Each
) Each
The flexible delineator measurements and payments are for Delineator, Reflective Sheeting of the
size and color specified, measured as "each", and for Post, Flexible, Delineator, also measured as
each.
The designer should make an estimate of each type of Delineator, Reflective Sheeting, based on the
patterns shown on the standard plan. These quantities are shown in the Miscellaneous Estimate on
the plans, as follows:
Delineator, Reflective Sheeting, 3 inch by 6 inch, White
Delineator, Reflective Sheeting, 3 inch by 6 inch, Yellow
Delineator, Reflective Sheeting, 3 inch by 12 inch, Yellow
Delineator, Reflective Sheeting, 3 inch by 6 inch, Green
Delineator, Reflective Sheeting, 3 inch by 6 inch, Red
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
) Each
) Each
) Each
) Each
) Each
) Each
) Each
) Each
) Each
Delineators with Red are to be used where red delineators are attached to the back of delineators on
ramps to face possible wrong-way traffic movements.
ROAD DESIGN MANUAL

ROAD DESIGN
7.06
7.06.02 (continued)
FENCING
Only controlled access highways are routinely

and continuously fenced. Exceptions, on such
highways, are where it can be definitely
established that a fence is not necessary,
such as in areas of precipitous slopes or
natural barriers.
7.06.01
References
A. Standard Plan R-97-Series, High Tensile
Eight Wire Fence
B. Standard Plan R-98-Series, Chain Link
Fence (Using Tension Wire)
C. Standard Plan R-101-Series, Woven Wire
Fence
D. Standard Plan R-102-Series, Installation
of Woven Wire Fence (At Structures)
E. An Informational Guide on Fencing
Controlled Access Highways, AASHTO,
October 1967. (This is the latest edition
published.)
F. Construction Manual, MDOT, Section 6.21
7.06.02
Purpose of Fence
Reference "E", above, states, "Fencing along
a highway is a means of preventing unwanted
and likely hazardous intrusion of animals,
people, vehicles, machines, etc., from outside
the right-of-way line into the vicinity of moving
traffic." In the early days of the development
of our highway system it was considered the
responsibility of the abutting property owner to
keep livestock within bounds. If someones
horse got out on the road and was hit, it was
the owner's fault and owner's loss. Today,
with higher vehicle speeds and controlled
access operation, the driver has the
expectation that the road will be clear of
roadside interference. It therefore has become
increasingly
the
highway
agency's
responsibility
to
safeguard
against
unwarranted intrusion on the highway.
7.06.03 (revised 8-18-2014)

Types of Fence
The following types of fence are used for the
applications indicated:
A. Woven Wire Fence
Woven wire fence, nominally about 4'-0" high,
is the predominant fence used in rural areas.
Steel posts are used, unless the fence is in
swampy soil, in which case wood posts are
used. The type of post, whether wood or
steel, must be indicated in the pay item, which
means that the designer must estimate where
swampy soils will be encountered along the
R.O.W. line. Normally, steel posts are less
expensive than wood, so a contractor will
want to use steel if possible. There have
been cases where the contractor has asked to
use wood posts throughout a project, and this
has been allowed.
B. Chain Link Fence
Chain link fence is predominantly used in
urban areas. Sometimes a project will require
both woven wire and chain link fence, if the
character of the adjacent development is both
rural and urban. If this is the case, the change
over point should be selected at a convenient
location at or near the end of the urbanized
section and not necessarily at the city limits.
ROAD DESIGN MANUAL

ROAD DESIGN
7.06.03 (continued)
7.06.04 (continued)
Types of Fence
In rural areas, the R.O.W. line will often

coincide with a quarter or section line, which
also may have formerly been a property
boundary when the area was farmed. These
old fence lines frequently became a
depository for stone piles and/or were allowed
to grow into a tree line. The question of
whether to remove the trees and stone piles,
or to place the fence inside the R.O.W. line to
avoid the costly removal, has been faced
repeatedly over the years.
Department
practice is, if at all possible, to remove the
debris and vegetation sufficient to place the
fence 1'-0" inside the R.O.W. line. However, it
must be remembered that a fencing contractor
is not equipped, nor does the contractor have
the personnel, to do extensive clearing. While
clearing of the line is included in the price paid
for fencing, it is customary to allow the fence
to veer around a large tree to avoid having to
remove it.
C. High Tensile Eight Wire Fence

High Tensile Eight Wire Fence, as a
right-of-way fence, is a substitute for woven
wire fence.
It is thought to be more
economical to construct because it consists of
individual strands of wire and has no vertical
tie wires. It is considered to be more
economical to maintain because a broken wire
can be spliced with a patented device and
re-tensioned, an obvious advantage when
compared with the rehabilitation of a broken
down or cut woven wire fence. Designers
should consult with the Region/TSC and
determine at the time of the plan review
meeting whether high tensile eight wire fence
should be used.
7.06.04
Location of Fence
Fence is ordinarily constructed 1'-0" inside the
R.O.W. line. This is in accordance with an old
common law custom that the owner of the
fence should be able to theoretically construct
and maintain it without setting foot on the
neighbor's property.
On urban freeways, where fence is used
between the freeway and the parallel service
road, the location of the "R.O.W. line"
between the two is often undefined. Usually,
the fence will be placed at a determined
distance from the inside service road curb,
which may be as little as 3' to as much as 20'
to 25'. The wider margin allows greater
flexibility for landscaping and plantings, but
the municipality must be willing to accept the
greater maintenance responsibility. The fence
should not be set back at a greater distance if
the reason for doing so is to justify paving the
area. See details of a typical fence installation
between a service road and urban freeway in
Section 12.01.05.
When chain link fence is used on urban

freeways, the gapping out for ramps and the
fence overlap should be accomplished as
shown on the next page.
ROAD DESIGN MANUAL

ROAD DESIGN
7.06.04 (continued)
Location of Fence
ROAD DESIGN MANUAL

ROAD DESIGN
7.06.05
7.06.06 (continued)
Use of Barbed Wire
Chain link fence may cause a special problem

at airports that are large enough to use radar,
as the fence fabric has been known to cause
ghost images on radar screens. Whenever
new fence is contemplated adjacent to a
major airport, the designer should coordinate
the proposed project with the Federal Aviation
Administration. It may be necessary to use a
non-metallic fence through the area off the
end of the runways.
In rural areas subject to stock grazing, woven

wire fence has traditionally been topped with a
single strand of barbed wire. This was done
to discourage farm animals from leaning over
the fence and breaking it down. However,
there are areas where it is obvious that
grazing will never occur, e.g., across state and
federal forest lands. When this condition
occurs, the barbed wire should be omitted, for
economy.
Barbed wire is seldom used in conjunction
with 4' and 6' chain link fence. (See Section
7.06.10) It may be used on top of 8' and 10'
chain link fence adjacent to areas where
special security measures are required, as
around an industrial plant. In these cases the
number of strands, and the direction they will
be angled, will be as requested by the
adjacent property owner, and may be part of
the R.O.W. agreement.
7.06.06
Chain Link Fence
Both 4' and 6' chain link fence are used, with
the higher fence favored adjacent to platted
subdivisions. To avoid intermittent stretches
of varying heights of fence, the designer
should attempt to limit any one run of either 4'
or 6' height to a minimum of 660' or 40 rods.
Initially, chain link fence was constructed on
our projects using a pipe top rail. In 1973 the
standard plan was changed to provide a
tension wire that would replace the top rail on
new construction. If the scope of a project
includes alteration or updating of chain link
fence that has a top rail, the fence should be
modified to provide the tension wire, and the
top rail should be removed.
There are also occasions when a woven fence

is warranted because of the surrounding rural
topography but the adjacent property owner
may specifically request chain link fence. On
one project where this occurred, in the Metro
area, an agreement was worked out whereby
the Department furnished the fencing
materials and the property owner erected it at
their own cost.
When the R.O.W. corridor has been
purchased well in advance of construction,
and subsequent residential areas have
developed adjacent to the R.O.W., it is not
unusual for the property owners to place their
own chain link fence on the R.O.W. line, in
their backyard. When the time comes to
fence the freeway R.O.W., the question
arises, "should a second chain link fence be
erected 1'-0" from the existing fence so that
the Department has complete ownership of
the R.O.W. fence?" While this has been
done, it creates an unsightly trash collector, it
makes both fences difficult to maintain, and it
is unnecessarily costly. The new fence should
simply tie into the existing fence at its ends,
assuming that the existing fence is in good
condition. If it is not in good condition, then an
agreement should be sought with the property
owner to remove the existing fence and allow
it to be replaced by the freeway R.O.W. fence.
ROAD DESIGN MANUAL

ROAD DESIGN
7.06.07 (revised 10-22-99)
7.06.09
Gates in Chain Link Fence
Fencing Scenic Strips
Gates should be provided in chain link fence

to provide access for maintenance equipment,
e.g.,
mowers,
cranes
for
servicing
pumphouses, etc. Width of gates should be a
minimum of 8'. The exact location and width
of gates will be determined by Region/TSC
personnel at the time of the plan review
meeting.
Scenic strips located adjacent to limited

access R.O.W. are usually fenced along the
back and sides, but not along the regular
R.O.W. line in front of the strip. Occasionally
a scenic strip was acquired after the R.O.W.
was fenced, in which case the area may be
completely enclosed by fence. If for some
reason this happens, a gate should be
provided in the regular R.O.W. fence to
provide vehicular access to the scenic strip.
No driveway should be provided, however.
Gates should preferably swing in toward the

freeway, and not out onto the service road
where an open gate could be struck by
service road traffic. If the service road
shoulder slope is continued upward past the
fence it could cause problems opening the
gate unless the earth is graded out somewhat
to accommodate the arc of the gate swing.
7.06.08 (revised 2-27-2012)

Fencing Clear Vision Areas
Clear vision areas are usually fenced, but it is
not a rule that they must be. There are
situations where the property owner may wish
to maintain the clear vision triangle as mowed
lawn, in which case a fence across the corner
would detract from the overall appearance
and inhibit trimming and mowing. In these
cases, the omission of the fence will be a
consideration in the negotiation with the
property owner, and safeguards to protect the
integrity of the clear vision area will be
included in the legal documents. These
safeguards will include prohibition against
parking equipment and vehicles in the area,
and keeping trees trimmed high so that there
is a clear line of sight. The designer should
set up fencing of clear vision areas on the
plans unless informed by the Development
Services Division to omit it at specific
locations.
7.06.10 (revised 12-22-2011)

Fencing Borrow Area Lakes and Retention
Basins
Borrow areas that have been excavated deep
enough to form lakes should be fenced with 6'
chain link fence, unless ownership is to be
transferred to private interests who do not
want the fence. Use 6' chain link fence with
three strands of barbed wire on top. Show the
fence located at least 10' to 15' from the
waters edge to enable a vehicle to drive
between the lake or pond and the fence. A
vehicular gate should be provided. Lakes
transferred to the jurisdiction of the Michigan
Department of Environmental Quality (MDEQ)
should be fenced.
Retention basins that can be expected to have
2'-0" or more of standing water for more than
a day or two should likewise be fenced.
ROAD DESIGN MANUAL

ROAD DESIGN
7.06.11
7.06.13 (continued)
Fence Between Twin Overpassing

Structures
Temporary fencing is used when it is not

possible to construct the permanent fence
until necessary grading is completed. This
may be in muck storage areas, areas of
grading permits, etc. Quantities of Temporary
Fence are estimated on the basis of 3% of the
total fencing for the project, with a minimum of
1320' or 80 rods. This quantity is shown in
the Miscellaneous Estimate, on the Note
Sheet. Removal of temporary fence is not
paid for separately.
When twin independent structures (without a

common backwall) carry a freeway over a
crossroad, and there is no interchange, the
median should be fenced on each side of the
crossroad to prevent or inhibit vehicle or
animal entry. The fence should preferably line
up with the abutment walls.
7.06.12
Guardrail in Conjunction With Fence
There have been occasions in the past where
there has been a reluctance to place guardrail
in front of a fence. It should be remembered
that guardrail does not serve the function of
fence, nor does fence serve the function of
guardrail, so if both are needed, both should
be constructed. As a matter of practicality,
however, the fence should be placed
sufficiently behind the guardrail, if possible, to
allow room for the expected guardrail
deflection. See Section 7.01.20.
7.06.13 (revised 2-27-2012)

Temporary Fence
The Development Services Division does not
pay for fencing as part of the limited access
R.O.W. agreement with property owners. (On
free access R.O.W., fencing is paid for as part
of the property settlement by the Development
Services Division.)
This means that a
problem could be created through areas of
stock grazing in that it could leave pasture
land unfenced for months during the
construction of the project. A General Plan
Note is placed on the Note Sheet that says,
"Permanent right-of-way fence shall be
constructed as the first operation in cases
where the right-of-way cuts across stock
grazing areas.
Temporary fencing, when
ordered by the Engineer, will be paid for at the
contract unit price for Fence, Temp.
In the event that grading and surfacing are let

as separate projects, the R.O.W. fence will, of
course, be included in the grading contract,
with the above provisions included.
7.06.14 (revised 12-22-2011)

Protective Fence
Protective Fence is woven wire or plastic
fence that is placed around deep excavations
such as those required for bridges,
pumphouses, and other structures. It is used
primarily to protect pedestrians and animals,
as directed by the Engineer, but may even be
used to protect trees. The road plans should,
on urban freeway projects, set up an amount
of Protective Fence equal to the length of the
project in feet, labeling it as "estimated". On
other urban projects and on rural projects, call
for the item if requested at the plan review
meeting.
If the pumphouse or structure is to be let
separately, Protective Fence should be
included in the plans for that structure. On
package projects, coordination will be required
between Road and Bridge Design to
determine which plans will show the fence
required to enclose "bathtub" construction.
ROAD DESIGN MANUAL

ROAD DESIGN
7.06.15 (revised 10-20-2008)
7.06.16
Removing Fence
Screening Fence
Payment for fencing includes the cost of

clearing and cleaning the fence line, which
includes any old fencing that may be there,
except in areas where Clearing for Fence is a
pay item. Removal of old fencing that is not
coincidental with the construction of new
fence should be paid for under the item
"Fence, Rem".
Construction of a screening or privacy fence is

not a common undertaking of the Department,
but it has been done.
One that was
constructed in East Lansing was wood, having
8' high panels, manufactured commercially.
An existing chain link fence was removed and
the screening fence placed generally along
the former fence line. The screening fence
overlapped the chain link fence at the ends by
about 3', and the details called for a maximum
allowable space underneath of 6", with a 2"
space as average. Post were set in concrete
3'-6" deep. The pay item was "8' Screening
Fence", measured in linear feet.
When tying highway fencing to an existing

intersecting private fence that has had to be
interrupted by the construction, necessary
corner bracing should be added to the private
fence, as required. The plans should call
attention to this requirement, which should not
be paid for separately.
If fence removal is required, but the quantity is
unknown, it is permissible to include the
removal in compensation for another pay item.
ROAD DESIGN MANUAL

ROAD DESIGN
7.07
7.07.02 (continued)
NOISE BARRIERS
Type I projects are for new highway

construction, reconstruction of an existing
highway, or the addition of one or more lanes
to an existing highway. Guidelines for noise
levels for residential, commercial, and special
sites are listed in 23 CFR 772. If highway
noise levels exceed the specified levels, on a
regular basis, then noise mitigation must be
considered. The warrants for noise barriers or
other noise attenuation devices must include
an economic cost-benefit analysis.
7.07.01 (revised 12-22-2011)

References
A. 23 CFR 772, Procedures for Abatement
of
Highway
Traffic
Noise
and
Construction Noise, FHWA, October
1997
B. An Inventory of Traffic Noise Levels
Along Limited Access Freeways in
Michigan, Revision of Research Report
R-1013A,
(formerly)
Materials
and
Technology Division, July 1981.
C. A Policy on Geometric Design of
Highways and Streets, AASHTO, 1994,
pages 375-381.
D. MDOT Noise Barrier Policy (guidelines
for highway noise barriers), January 1978
and January 1982
Type II projects are proposed Federal or

Federal-aid projects for noise abatement on
an existing highway, with no other concurrent
reconstruction or lane addition being
considered. This is a voluntary program and
states wanting to participate must meet
certain requirements. In order to be eligible
for federal participation the Department had to
establish a "Noise Barrier Policy", prepare an
inventory of sites where highway noise levels
exceed FHWA noise guidelines, and establish
a priority system for treatment of the identified
sites.
7.07.02 (revised 12-22-2011)

General
The concept of traffic noise attenuation
became an integral part of highway planning
and design in 1976 when FHWA first issued
Procedures for Abatement of Highway
Traffic Noise and Construction Noise
(currently 23 CFR 772).
This regulation
established two types of noise mitigation
projects, which are continued to the present.
Noise attenuation is confined almost entirely

to freeways, although there are one or two
locations in the state where an earth mound
sound barrier has been constructed along a
free access route. Generally, the distance
between access points, i.e., necessitating an
opening in a barrier, are so close on a free
access road that a barrier would not be
practical.
Responsibilities for noise barrier investigation,
evaluation, and design are generally divided
as shown in the following chart:
Technical investigation and analysis
Instrumentation and Data Systems Unit,

Construction Field Services Division
Environmental Impact Statement
Bureau of Planning, Transportation Planning

Services Division
Choice of noise barrier type, general details of

design
Roadside Development Design Unit, Design

Division
Noise barrier structural analysis
Bridge Design Special Assignment Unit, Design

Division
Noise barrier design details
Road Design Unit, Region/TSC
ROAD DESIGN MANUAL

ROAD DESIGN
7.07.03
7.07.04
Technical Aspect of Sound Transmission
Current Requirements and Practices
The sound pressure level (SPL) is equal to 20

times the logarithm of the ratio of the sound
pressure measured to the reference sound
pressure. The reference sound pressure is
20 x 10 Pascal.
The unit of SPL is the
decibel. The sound is also A weighted so that
the measurement is similar to the frequency
response of the human ear. The unit is
abbreviated dbA.
23 CFR 772 (current issue is dated October

1997) requires highway noise to be analyzed
in each environmental document.
If the
predicted design year noise level is greater
than the stated FHWA noise level guidelines,
then the affected residential properties or
special sites must be analyzed for possible
noise abatement in conjunction with the
highway improvement.
Because decibels are in logarithms, doubling

the sound pressure only raises the decibel
level 3 dbA. Also, an apparent doubling of the
sound level to the human ear occurs when the
decibel level is increased by 10 dbA. The
human ear can perceive a difference at 1 dbA
when sound levels are presented on a
comparative basis. However, the human ear
cannot detect a change in highway noise level
until the change amounts to about 3 dbA.
The Department has established noise

guidelines for Type II noise barrier projects.
These guidelines have received FHWA
approval.
The Department was also instrumental in
obtaining vehicle noise legislation. In 1978,
Section 707 of the Michigan Vehicle Code
was changed to limit the level of noise that a
car, truck, or motorcycle can produce on a
roadway.
The Department assists local
enforcement agencies in administering that
law, and makes periodic noise measurements
to insure contractor compliance with
construction noise specifications.
ROAD DESIGN MANUAL

ROAD DESIGN
7.07.05 (revised 12-22-2011)
7.07.06
Process for Type I Projects
Process for Type II Projects
Type I projects are initiated by the

environmental document prepared for each
highway improvement project, whether it be
an EIS or FONSI, with the Construction Field
Services Division preparing the entire noise
portion of the document. All homes are
analyzed, even those that are widely
scattered, though it is recognized that there is
not enough money available to treat individual
homes with a noise barrier. (Individual homes
may be granted an exception to allow them to
be treated, however, by adding insulation,
solid core doors, storm windows, or air
conditioning that would allow the residence to
remain closed during hotter weather, thereby
reducing interior noise levels.)
The construction of Type II noise barrier

projects is entirely dependent upon the
funding annually set aside for this purpose.
The same federal funds that are used for
Interstate
preservation
and
capacity
improvements also provide funding for noise
abatement. Obviously, there is much more
potential barrier construction classified as
Type II than Type I, as Type II encompasses
the entire trunkline system, not just new
projects. It is significant when considering
Type II projects to know whether or not the
highway preceded the construction of a
subdivision, or vice versa, as it then becomes
a question of whether or not the builders and
buyers of homes did so with full knowledge of
the highway-related environment.
The
Department uses the date on which a
subdivision was platted, or the date the area
was zoned residential, as this date is easily
determined and undisputed.
Existing subdivisions are examined, the

number of homes counted in the first, second,
third, etc. rows back from the highway, and
the cost of shielding these homes is
estimated. The Department's noise policy
requires that at least a 6 dBA reduction be
achieved in the noise level for attenuation
measures to be considered worthwhile. They
also set Leq = 67 dBA as the guideline for
maximum sound level in a residential area.
(Leq is the average intensity of sound in the
30th high hour, or at level of service "C",
whichever is worse. Level of service "C" is
considered the theoretical worst traffic
condition for noise; beyond it the movement of
traffic starts to break down, with a
corresponding reduction in noise levels
generated.)
A public meeting or hearing is then held. The
Department, however, relies upon input from
the local unit of government, rather than the
public at large, in making the final
determination relative to constructing a noise
barrier. Even though all the data may point to
the need for a noise barrier, if the public
hearing reveals that the people as a whole do
not want it, the Department will not build it.
An inventory has been made of the noise

levels at all the residential sites along
Michigan freeways. There are 1,135 such
sites. These are ranked by predicted (as of
1981) noise levels, length of area and "who
was there first", and a priority factor is
computed. Priority #1 covers those situations
where the highway came after the homes,
Priority #2 covers those situations where the
homes came after the highway.
Mitigation measures are then proposed, an
informal public meeting is held, and, as in the
Type I process, the Department takes its cue
from the local governmental agency whether
or not to proceed with the noise barrier. It can
be seen that, with 1,135 sites, and treating
two or three each year, most will never be
treated.
ROAD DESIGN MANUAL

ROAD DESIGN
7.07.07 (revised 12-22-2011)
7.07.08
Design Considerations for Noise Barriers
Of the various types of possible noise barriers

that could be used, the Roadside
Development Design Unit attempts to select
the one that best fits the community and the
site. For example, if there are existing large
plantings that would be on the highway side of
a noise barrier, a metal wall would probably
be much more suitable than an earth berm,
because the metal wall can be jogged in and
out around the trees whereas an earth berm
would probably require removal of the trees.
On the other hand, if R.O.W. is sufficiently
wide, trees are not a problem, and earth is
available nearby, an earth berm would
probably be most economical. (Required
heights are lower for an earth berm than they
are for walls.) The Roadside Development
unit will work closely with the Road design unit
in choosing details of the noise barrier.
Michigan has used 7 basic types of noise

barriers: earth mound, concrete panels in
H-beam slots, brick, metal, wood, concrete
stab-in panels, and concrete block. These are
briefly discussed as follows:
While various density materials are suitable

for use as noise barriers, a minimum density
of about 4 pounds per square foot is required
to adequately prevent sound transmission
through the material.
Construction Field Services Division will ask
for a survey of the R.O.W. fence, then will
furnish the height and length requirements for
the noise barrier, along with elevations of the
top of the barrier throughout its length. This
information is included in the Environmental
Clearance.
The noise barrier should be longer (on each
end) than the area to be shielded by a factor
of 4 times the distance between the highway
and the observer, i.e., the nearest activity to
be shielded. This approximates a 45 degree
angle from the observer to the end of the wall,
and results in an overlap.
A. Earth mound - This is the first preference

if R.O.W. is available, earth can be
obtained at reasonable cost, and utilities
are not affected. A major drawback is that
it requires considerable space.
The
requirements for an earth mound are
contained in Reference "B", Section
7.07.01.
B. Concrete panels in H-beam slots Concrete or steel H-beam posts are
embedded in the soil, then precast and
post-tensioned concrete panels, perhaps
4' high by 20' long by 6" thick are inserted
in the slots formed by opposing posts, one
panel on top of the other. Frequently
random designs are incorporated in the
panels by means of form liners, or the
plastic concrete may be raked on one side
to give a texture that appears darker, by
contrast, than smooth concrete.
A
variation previously used involved colored
panels 18" high by 10' long by 4" thick.
The panel ends must rest upon a footing,
and the bottom of the lowest panel must
be below ground line so noise cannot
pass underneath. These panels are very
durable but are susceptible to painting of
graffiti if the concrete is smooth or raked.
ROAD DESIGN MANUAL

ROAD DESIGN
7.07.08 (continued)
7.07.08 (continued)
F. Stab-in concrete panels - As the term

implies, stab-in noise walls are composed
of precast concrete panels that have
stability by virtue of having about one-third
of their length embedded in the ground,
thus eliminating the need for supporting
H-beam columns. The panels are usually
heavier than the simple panels described
in "B", preceding, and have tongue and
grooved edges to allow sealing of the
joints. They require no foundation, and
the height of the panels can be staggered.
However, the required depth of embedment
is not compatible with a concentration of
underground utilities.
C. Brick - Brick has proven to be a popular

noise wall material, especially in an urban
setting. If close to the highway, a 30" high
concrete base wall may be cast, with a 4"
thick clay brick wall on top, utilizing brick
pilasters on the residence side for rigidity
and strength. If the wall is somewhat back
from the highway, the concrete base wall
will be omitted and the wall constructed
entirely of brick (though brick also requires
a footing). A range of colors are available.
D. Metal - Metal noise walls are an outgrowth
of metal building construction.
Their
principal advantage is that they can be
painted to almost any desired color, e.g.,
brown, if earth tones are desired. They
can be easily jogged to change alignment
or can be built through or near trees that
need to be saved, and the height can be
easily varied for visual effect.
They
probably require more maintenance than a
concrete wall, but they are less expensive
initially as they do not require full-length
footings. Different color selections and
textures are available.
E. Wood - One of our earliest noise walls
was built of wood. Initially, there were
visual problems because of the blotchy
effect of the creosote preservative, and
warpage of the boards created cracks that
allowed the sound to go through the wall.
Techniques now call for water-borne and
Penta preservatives, and panels are
constructed of 2" x 6" lumber with double
walled treated plywood. These panels
may be 2' x 10', or 2' x 12'. Advantages of
wood are that it is comparatively light,
allowing its use for sound walls on top of
bridge railings, and it does not require full
length footings.
G. Concrete block - Concrete block is a

rather economical alternate to other forms
of concrete noise walls. Blocks can be
made rough on one side and smooth on
the other, or can be alternated to achieve
a pattern. It is essential that water be kept
out of the core holes, otherwise it will
freeze and break off the block faces. One
wall has been constructed with a concrete
block bottom and a wood wall higher up.
Concrete block walls require full length
footings. A wide range of colors and
textures are available.
7.07.09
Landscape Treatment
Landscape plans, prepared by the Roadside
Development Design Unit, should be a part of
every noise barrier project.
ROAD DESIGN MANUAL

ROAD DESIGN
7.08
7.08.02 (continued)
MAILBOX POSTS
a
mailbox
post
having
a
smaller
cross-sectional
area
than
previously.
Alternate mailbox support designs meeting the
performance criteria of NCHRP Report 350 or
MASH may be used as approved by the
Engineer.
7.08.01 (revised 10-21-2013)

References
A. Standard Plan R-74-Series, Bumper &
Parking Rails, and Misc. Wood Posts
B. Roadside Design
2011, Chapter 11
Guide,
AASHTO,
7.08.02 (revised 10-21-2013)

General
Typically, the post supported rural mailbox is
private property that occupies the R.O.W. by
permission. During construction activities, the
Department assumes the responsibility for
maintaining
serviceability
of
existing
mailboxes. After construction activities are
completed, the Department or its contractor
will place a department approved support at
the permanent location, remove the mailbox
from the old support and attach it firmly to the
new post, and dispose of the old support. The
property owner shall be given the option of
disposing of the old support. Existing
newspaper boxes are removed and stored for
the property owners future installation and are
not paid for separately.
Even though the authority to regulate mailbox
installations is not well defined, the property
owner
should
be
discouraged
from
reconstructing unusual mailbox installations.
Crash tests seem to show that the mailboxes
that remain attached to the post go down
under impact and away from the vehicle.
Attaching several boxes to one large
horizontal support is discouraged by Chapter
11 of the Roadside Design Guide, AASHTO,
2011. Department standard plans now show
7.08.03 (revised 10-21-2013)

Design Considerations
As a part of the design, the number of existing
mailboxes should be determined and used as
a basis for estimating the number of mailbox
posts to be placed on the project. Sometimes
this can be determined from the plans if
buildings are included in the topography
shown, but this method is usually not as
accurate as actually counting those in the
field. The photolog is a reliable source of this
information. Internet mapping websites can
also be used.
Placement of mailboxes in a curb and gutter
section may pose questions, particularly if a
curb is being constructed where it did not exist
before. If it is a barrier curb, the posts must be
within arms reach of the face of curb; the
question then is, are existing boxes
concentrated on one side only, or on both
sides of the road? If the curb is a roll curb,
then the boxes can either be directly behind
the curb or at the far edge of shoulder. Either
location has advantages and disadvantages.
If immediately behind the curb, the post may
interfere with the movement of vehicles on the
shoulder, pedestrians, and bicyclists, as well
as snow removal on the shoulder. If placed at
the far edge of the shoulder, the shoulder
should be strong enough and wide enough for
the delivery vehicle to get completely off the
road. Snow removal may not always be
complete to the point that the shoulder area is
clear, back to the boxes. Generally, however,
it has been our practice to place the boxes, in
a roll curbed section, at the back of the
shoulder, particularly if the purpose of the roll
curb and paved shoulder is to provide a
bicycle path. Traffic volume and speed are
considerations that will influence the location
of mailboxes in a roll curb and gutter section.
ROAD DESIGN MANUAL

ROAD DESIGN
7.09
CONCRETE STEPS
7.09.01
General
Concrete steps, with a pipe handrail, are not
built as part of a highway project as frequently
as they once were. Before designers were as
conscious of safety and clear zones as they
are now, it was not uncommon to construct
concrete steps on a cut backslope to facilitate
a property owner's access to a mailbox. This
would not normally be done anymore,
because the concrete structure would
probably be located within the clear zone.
Steps are, of course, constructed to facilitate
frequent access up or down steep slopes.
Before a decision is made to provide steps for
this purpose, the designer should be satisfied
that the structure is indeed outside the clear
zone. In the rare case that concrete steps are
included in a project, consult the Roadside
Development Unit for step details and
requirements.

Index Appurtenances: Michigan Design Manual Road Design

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Index Appurtenances: Michigan Design Manual Road Design

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Index Appurtenances: Michigan Design Manual Road Design

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

MICHIGAN DESIGN MANUAL

ROADSIDE SAFETY BARRIER

Application of Section 7.01

History of Guardrail and Barrier in Michigan

Basic Concepts for Roadside Control

Clear Zone - History

Current Clear Zone Criteria

Types of Guardrail Used in Michigan

Curved Beam Elements

Guardrail Surface Finish

Guardrail Attachment to Bridges and Walls

Strength Requirements of Steel Beam Guardrail

Suggested Shy Line Offset Values

MICHIGAN DESIGN MANUAL

Suggested Runout Lengths for Barrier Design

Guardrail Strength Transitions

Minimum Guardrail Lengths and Gaps

Function of Guardrail Components

Guardrail Approach Terminals

Shielding Bodies of Water

Barrier at Bridge Approaches (Over and Under)

Maintaining Guardrail Strength When One or More Posts Must be Omitted

MICHIGAN DESIGN MANUAL

Guardrail in Conjunction with Curb

Guardrail Posts for Roadside Control

Upgrading and Replacement of Guardrail

Guidelines for Bridge Railing Replacement and

Guardrail Upgrading on Local Roads

Alternative Barrier End Treatments

Temporary Beam Guardrail

Warrants for Median Barriers for Freeways

Median Barriers Types

Concrete Median Barrier

Ending Concrete Barrier

Two Types of Concrete Median Barrier Footings

MICHIGAN DESIGN MANUAL

Concrete Glare Screen

Retrofitting Concrete Median Barrier

Concrete Median Barrier Between Roadways of Different Elevations

Concrete Barrier, Single Face

Ending Temporary Barrier

Temporary Barrier at Bridge Deck and Railing Reconstruction

Temporary Barrier Adjacent to a Precipitous Drop-off

Concrete Filler Walls

Criterion for Use

Temporary Pavement Markings

Pavement Marking Quantities

Removing Permanent Pavement Markings

Statutory Participating Cities

Witness, Log and Layout

MICHIGAN DESIGN MANUAL

TRAFFIC SIGNS AND ROADWAY DELINEATORS

Use of Barbed Wire

Chain Link Fence

Gates in Chain Link Fence

Fencing Clear Vision Areas

Fencing Scenic Strips

Fencing Borrow Area Lakes and Retention Basins

Fence Between Twin Overpassing Structures