Bridge Railing Manual PDF
Bridge Railing Manual PDF
May 2006
by Texas Department of Transportation
(512) 416-2055 all rights reserved
Purpose
This manual summarizes current policies governing the use of bridge railing in Texas, and it pro-
vides information on acceptable Texas bridge railing types.
Supercedes
Changes
This revision updates state policy on railing for bridge-class culverts, identifies railings that are
acceptable but no longer used for new construction, adds an index, and makes minor editorial
corrections.
Contact
For more information about this update, contact the Bridge Division.
Archives
Contents:
Section 1 About This Manual
Section 2 FHWA Policy on Bridge Railing
Section 3 Overview of Texas Policy on Bridge Railing
Section 1
About This Manual
Purpose
This manual provides guidance on selection of railing for Texas bridges. The manual is intended for
the use of Texas Department of Transportation (TxDOT) District and division personnel and for
consultants employed by TxDOT.
Manual Revision History
2002-1 February 2002 Revision adding information on acceptability of T6 railing types for use
limited to low speed applications.
2003-1 August 2003 Revision adding information about acceptability of in-place railing that
complies with NCHRP-230 requirements, adding information about rail-
ing on culverts, adding information about railing on bridges scheduled
for maintenance overlays, adding information about the T502 and C502
railing types, adding profile sketches and information about minimum
heights after maintenance overlays for specific railing types, and clarify-
ing bridge slope requirements.
2005-1 June 2005 Revision removing references to C101 metal railing, adding references
to the Rail Anchorage Curb Retrofit standard drawing, and adding
descriptions of the following new railings: T401, T402, C402, and T77
metal and concrete railing, and T221, C221, and B221 concrete railing.
2006-1 May 2006 Revision updating state policy on railing for bridge-class culverts, iden-
tifying railings that are acceptable but no longer used for new
construction, adding an index, and making minor editorial corrections.
Organization
Chapter 5, Pedestrian, Bicycle, and ADA Requirements for Bridge Railing. Guidelines for
selecting bridge railing that meets needs of non-vehicular traffic.
Feedback
Direct any questions or comments on the content of the manual to the Director of the Bridge Divi-
sion, Texas Department of Transportation.
Section 2
FHWA Policy on Bridge Railing
Overview
Since September 1, 1986, the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) has required highway
bridges on the National Highway System (NHS) and the Interstate Highway System to have crash-
tested railing. Current policy is stated in the following documents:
Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991 (ISTEA).
http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/legsregs/legislat.html
Requires that measures to enhance the crash worthiness of roadside features accommodate
vans, minivans, pickup trucks, and 4-wheel drive vehicles, as well as cars.
National Cooperative Highway Research Program (NCHRP) Report 350, Recommended Pro-
cedures for the Safety Performance Evaluation of Highway Features.
http://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/programs/roadside_hardware.htm
Provides guidance for testing highway features to assess safety performance of those features,
replacing guidance defined in NCHRP Report 230. Guidance includes definitions of crash-test
levels with specified vehicle, speed, and impact angle for each level.
Recording and Coding Guide for the Structure Inventory and Appraisal of the Nations
Bridges. Report No. FHWA-PD-96-001, p. 69.
http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/bridge/mtguide.pdf
Clarifies that safety feature replacement or upgrading (for example, bridge rail...) is a type of
work eligible for funding under any of the Federal aid categories but not considered as recon-
struction and, therefore, not activating the FHWAs Ten Year Rule (see linked
memorandum), which disqualifies a bridge for additional federal aid Highway Bridge Program
funds for a period of ten years after any federal funds have been used on a new bridge, recon-
structed bridge, or major bridge rehabilitation.
May 30, 1997, memorandum from Dwight Horne on the subject of Crash Testing of Bridge
Railings.
http://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/fourthlevel/hardware/pdf/bridge.pdf
Identifies 68 crash-tested bridge rails, consolidating earlier listings and establishing tentative
equivalency ratings that relate previous testing to NCHRP Report 350 test levels. Ten of the 68
crash-tested rails were developed and tested in Texas.
July 25, 1997, memorandum from Donald Steinke on the subject of Identifying Acceptable
Highway Safety Features.
http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/legsregs/directives/policy/ra.htm
Clarifies and summarizes policies on bridge railing, points to authorities for requiring testing
of bridge railing, and identifies methods for submitting new rails for testing. This document
also identifies exceptions, one of which is the replacement or retrofitting of existing bridge
railing unless improvements are being made on a stretch of highway that includes a bridge with
obsolete railing.
August 28, 1998, memorandum from Henry Rentz on the subject of National Cooperative
Highway Research Program (NCHRP) Report 350 Hardware Compliance Dates and the
attachment to the memorandum.
http://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/fourthlevel/memo.htm
Extends implementation dates and adds caveats for use of safety hardware in new installations
and 3R projects. Explicitly assigns responsibility to transportation agencies for defining
...when extensions, relocation, adjustments or major repairs to a feature constitute a new
installation and whether ...features that meet the acceptance requirements recommended in
NCHRP Report 230...may remain in place.
May 16, 2000, memorandum from Frederick Wright on the subject of Bridge Rail Analysis.
http://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/fourthlevel/hardware/pdf/bridgerail_analysis_may16.pdf
Allows responsible transportation agencies to request FHWA acceptance of a specific bridge
railing type that has not been crash tested based on analysis showing its similarity to a design
that has been crash-tested and found compliant with NCHRP-350 requirements.
On its web site, FHWA provides current information on three general categories of roadside hard-
ware that are tested and evaluated using NCHRP Report 350 criteria; one of those categories is
Bridge Railing: http://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/fourthlevel/hardware/bridgerailings.htm
In summary, FHWA policy is that all new or replacement railing on National Highway System or
Interstate Highway System bridges must meet Test Level 3 (TL-3) crash-test criteria at a minimum.
However, responsible transportation agencies have limited latitude to define when existing railing
that complies with requirements of NCHRP Report 230 must be replaced.
For evaluating bridge railing, the NCHRP Report 350 defines two occupant-hazard tests and six
strength tests at each crash-test level, as follows.
Crash Tests Required by NCHRP Report 350
NOTE: Occupant-hazard and strength tests using the pickup are the same for TL-1 through TL-3.
Section 3
Overview of Texas Policy on Bridge Railing
Overview
New bridges. Texas bridge railing on new construction must meet FHWA crash-test criteria as
specified in NCHRP Report 350.
Existing bridges scheduled for rehabilitation. TxDOT evaluates bridge railing for conformance
to current standards whenever any improvements are made to any bridge or its approach roadway.
In general, an existing obsolete railing within a safety improvement project must be brought up to
current standards, or else the project must obtain a design exception, providing that railing replace-
ment is scheduled within a reasonable time. However, if bridge railing complies with requirements
predating NCHRP Report 350 (expressed in NCHRP Report 230), is already in place in a non-free-
way rehabilitation (3R) project, and is not scheduled to be upgraded by the project, upgrade may
not be required.
Bridge Division staff are available to advise districts on requirements and on options.
Existing bridges not scheduled for rehabilitation. Obsolete railing need not be brought up to cur-
rent standards on a bridge that is not being rehabilitated.
A bridge railing type can be approved for use on Texas bridges in any one of the following ways:
It has been successfully crash tested in accordance with NCHRP Report 350 criteria.
It has been approved for specific uses by FHWA after evaluation of results from successful
crash testing based on criteria that predate NCHRP Report 350.
It has been evaluated by TxDOT and identified as similar in strength and geometry to another
rail that has been successfully crash tested in accordance with NCHRP Report 350 criteria.
Bridge railing on any Texas bridge must connect with roadside guard railing if it is present. TxDOT
provides railing transition details in Design Division Standards and transition connection details in
Bridge Division Standards. The transition selected must be appropriate for
Railing on Culverts
Protect the ends of bridge-class pipe and box culverts by providing, in order of pref-
erence, safety end treatments, metal beam guard fence, or bridge railing as described in the
Drainage Facility Placement section of the Roadway Design Manual regardless of hori-
zontal clearance (clear zone). Bridge railing is frequently not an
option with bridge-class pipe culverts. A pedestrian-only railing
used alone is not acceptable for bridge-class culverts; traffic
railing or combination railing must protect pedestrians and pedes-
trian-only railing from vehicular traffic on bridge-class
culverts. Alternatively, a safety-end treatment can be used with a
pedestrian-only railing.
Railing on bridge-class culverts must conform to the same requirements as bridge railing, with the
following exceptions:
Metal beam guard fence meets TL-3 requirements and is an option only if 44 inches
of fill is present and posts are embedded as required on the
Metal Beam Guard Fence standard drawing. Bolting posts to a bridge-class
culvert is not allowed.
Bridge railings must be properly anchored using the details shown on the Rail Anchorage Curb
standard drawing and the details shown on the standard drawing for the selected bridge railing
type. Another standard drawing, T6-CM, provides details for
anchoring a Type T6 rail to culverts.
For existing box culverts where bridge rail is required, anchor the railing properly using the details
shown on the standard drawing for the selected bridge railing type and the details shown on the Rail
Anchorage Curb Retrofit guide drawing, which applies for fill heights of 2 ft. or less. If the Rail
Anchorage Curb Retrofit guide drawing does not apply, the Bridge Division is available to provide
project specific details for the addition of bridge railing.
Contents:
Section 1 Overview
Section 2 Metal Railing
Section 3 Metal and Concrete Railing
Section 4 Concrete Railing
Section 1
Overview
Overview
All new Texas bridge railing must meet FHWA crash-test criteria as specified in NCHRP Report
350. The following tables identify bridge railing that will be coded as acceptable in TxDOT bridge
inspections. Except where noted in individual railing type descriptions, these railing types meet
crash-test criteria for use at the level specified in Sections 2 through 4 of this chapter.
Texas bridge railing type names use alphanumeric sequences in which the following conventions
are usually observed:
T indicates railing for vehicular traffic.
P indicates railing for pedestrian traffic.
C indicates railing for a combination of vehicular and pedestrian traffic.
B indicates railing for bicycle traffic.
R indicates retrofitted railing.
HT indicates heavy truck railing.
TT indicates tank truck railing.
SSTR indicates single slope traffic railing.
S indicates steel railing.
A indicates aluminum railing.
NOTE: The nominal face of railing is one foot from the outside edge of bridge slabs, regardless
of actual physical dimensions.
Texas currently uses standard metal railing summarized in the following table.
Metal Railing
Approval
Railing Type Level Description
T101 TL-3 Steel posts and tubular rails with W beam; designed for vehicular traffic.
T6 TL-2 Steel breakaway posts with tubular W-beam railing; designed for vehic-
ular traffic.
PR1 Not Steel post and pipe railing; designed for pedestrian use only.
Applicable
Texas currently uses standard metal and concrete railing summarized in the following table.
Metal and Concrete Railing
Approval
Railing Type Level Description
T401 TL-3 Concrete parapet with steel railing; designed for vehicular traffic.
T402 TL-3 Concrete parapet with steel railing; designed for vehicular traffic.
C402 TL-3 Concrete parapet with steel railing; designed for both vehicular and
pedestrian traffic.
T77 TL-3 Short concrete parapet with steel railing; designed for vehicular traffic.
HT TL-5 Modified concrete safety-shaped parapet with steel railing; designed for
heavy truck traffic.
PR2 Not Short concrete parapet with steel posts and pipe railing; designed for
Applicable pedestrian use only.
Texas currently uses standard concrete railing summarized in the following table.
Concrete Railing
Approval
Railing Type Level Description
T203 TL-3 Concrete posts with concrete railing; designed for vehicular traffic.
C203 TL-2 Concrete posts with concrete railing; designed for both vehicular and
pedestrian traffic.
C221 TL-2 Concrete parapet; designed for both vehicular and pedestrian traffic.
B221 Not Concrete parapet with chain-link fence; designed for bicycle and pedes-
Applicable trian traffic.
T411 TL-2 Concrete with 6-inch windows; designed for vehicular traffic.
C411 TL-2 Concrete with 6-inch windows; designed for both vehicular and pedes-
trian traffic.
T501 TL-4 Concrete safety shaped parapet; designed for vehicular traffic.
T501SW TL-4 8-foot reinforced concrete safety-shaped parapet and vertical wall;
designed for use on bridges and on pavement.
NOTE: This railing is intended to protect highly vulnerable sites
beneath a bridge.
C501 TL-2 Concrete safety shaped parapet; designed for both vehicular and pedes-
trian traffic.
Concrete Railing
Approval
Railing Type Level Description
T502 TL-4 Concrete safety shaped parapet with multiple drain slots; designed for
vehicular traffic.
C502 TL-2 Concrete safety shaped parapet with multiple drain slots; designed for
both vehicular and pedestrian traffic.
T503 TL-4 Precast concrete safety-shaped parapet bolted to slab; designed for
vehicular traffic.
T504 TL-4 Precast concrete safety-shaped parapet bolted to slab and designed for
box-beam and slab-beam structures; designed for vehicular traffic.
SSTR TL-3 Constant slope concrete parapet similar to single slope concrete median
barrier; designed for vehicular traffic.
TT TL-6 Modified concrete safety-shaped parapet with concrete posts and con-
crete railing; designed for heavy tank truck traffic.
NOTE: This railing is intended to protect highly vulnerable sites
beneath a bridge.
Approva
Railing Type l Level Description
Approva
Railing Type l Level Description
C Railing Types
Combination railing types C201, C203, C221, C501, and C502 are considered acceptable only for
slow-speed use (TL-2) with a design speed of 45 mph or less because their pipe rail presents an
occupant compartment intrusion threat to high speed vehicular traffic. However, the C4 (S) and
C402 railing types are considered acceptable for higher speed use (TL-3) with a design speed
greater than 45 mph.
Sound Walls
Recent years have produced interest in sound barriers for the sides of highways and on bridge over-
passes, particularly in suburban areas. The Traffic Railing Type T501SW is approved for TL-4 use
on Texas bridges. TxDOT does not recommend installation of concrete sound barriers mounted on
top of concrete bridge railing for these reasons:
The sound barrier mass changes the vehicle impact behavior with the railing.
The sound barrier connections at the top of the railing cannot be acceptably anchored.
Open rails on Texas bridges enhance the bridge users view from the bridge and often improve the
appearance of the bridge. TxDOT encourages the use of open bridge railing on Texas bridges
whenever possible. The cost premium of open bridge railing can usually be offset by increased pos-
itive perception of the public.
More Information
See the following sections for descriptions of these bridge railing types. For more detailed informa-
tion on Texas bridge railing, refer to TxDOT Bridge Division Railing Standards.
http://www.dot.state.tx.us/insdtdot/orgchart/cmd/cserve/standard/bridge-e.htm
For information about crash-tested railing currently available or about railing currently under
design, contact the TxDOT Bridge Division.
Section 2
Metal Railing
Profile Description
This railing is 27 inches high with two rectangular tubes and W beam, and with W6X20
posts spaced a maximum of 8.33 ft. apart. Its minimum height after maintenance overlays is
27 inches.
The T101 railing was approved for TL-3 use after evaluation of results from successful crash test-
ing in 1978. See Figure 2-1, below.
Profile Description
This railing is 32 inches high and all steel. This railing has a 10.75-inch, round-pipe rail
centered at 14 inches high and a 5.56-inch, round-pipe rail at 32 inches high. Its posts are
slanted and are 5.56 inches in diameter, spaced a maximum of 7 ft. apart. Its minimum
height after maintenance overlays is not yet established.
NOTE: This railing is no longer used for new construction.
The T421 railing was crash tested in 1989 with a 4,500-lb. large car at 62 mph and at an angle of
impact of 25 degrees. It was approved for TL-2 use (a design speed of 45 mph or less) after evalua-
tion of the results from its 1989 crash testing. See Figure 2-2, below.
Profile Description
This railing is 27 inches high with two W-beam members welded back to back and with
breakaway posts spaced a maximum of 6.25 ft. apart. Its minimum height after maintenance
overlays is 27 inches.
This railing is acceptable for TL-2 use (a design speed of 45 mph or less).
Profile Description
This railing is 42 inches high and all steel. It has six pipe rails, with 3-inch standard steel
pipe for the top rail and 2-inch standard steel pipe for the lower rails. Its 5-inch wide steel-
plate posts are spaced a maximum of 10 ft. apart. Its minimum height after maintenance
overlays is 42 inches.
The PR1 railing is designed for pedestrian loads only. It has not been crash tested, and it is not
intended for exposure to traffic. If this railing is used on a bridge or culvert, it must be protected
from vehicular impact by an approved bridge railing type. See Figure 2-3, below.
Section 3
Metal and Concrete Railing
Profile Description
This railing is 33 inches high with an 18-inch concrete parapet and a steel ellipse 15 inches
above the concrete. It has twin one-inch cut-plate posts spaced a maximum of 10 ft. apart.
Its minimum height after maintenance overlays is not yet established.
NOTE: This railing is no longer used for new construction. It
has been superseded for new construction by the T401
railing.
The 33-inch T4 (S) railing has not been crash tested; however, TxDOT considers it as equal in
strength and geometry to the Type T4 (A) railing, which was crash tested in 1999 and is approved
for TL-3 use. See Figure 2-4, below.
Profile Description
This railing is 33 inches high with an 18-inch concrete parapet and an aluminum, bullet-
shaped ellipse 15 inches above the concrete. It has thick, cast aluminum posts spaced a
maximum of 8.33 ft. apart. Its minimum height after maintenance overlays has not yet been
established.
NOTE: This railing is no longer used for new construction.
The T4 (A) railing was crash tested in 1999 with a 4,409-lb. pickup truck at 62 mph and at an angle
of impact of 25 degrees. It is approved for TL-3 use. See Figure 2-5, below.
Profile Description
This railing is 42 inches high with a 24-inch concrete parapet, a steel ellipse at 18 inches
above the concrete, and a pipe rail between the steel ellipse and the concrete. It has twin
one-inch cut-plate posts spaced a maximum of 10 ft. apart. Its minimum height after main-
tenance overlays is 42 inches.
NOTE: This railing is no longer used for new construction. It
has been superseded for new construction by the C402
railing.
TxDOT considers the 42-inch C4 (S) railing acceptable for TL-3 use. However, its pipe rail should
be removed when the C4 (S) is used in high-speed applications.
Profile Description
This railing is 33-inches high with an 18-inch concrete parapet and a steel ellipse 15 inches
above the concrete. It has twin one-inch cut-plate posts spaced a maximum of 10 ft. apart. It
features a bolt anchorage system for the steel rail posts that may be drilled and epoxy-
anchored allowing slip-forming of the concrete parapet. Its parapet is thicker than the T4(S)
rail, from which its design is derived.
TxDOT considers this railing equal in strength and geometry to the Type T4(A) railing, which was
crash tested in 1999 and is approved for TL-3 use.
Profile Description
This railing is 42 inches high with a 24-inch concrete parapet and a steel ellipse 18 inches
above the concrete. It has twin one-inch cut-plate posts spaced a maximum of 10 ft. apart. It
features a bolt anchorage system for the steel rail posts that may be drilled and epoxy-
anchored allowing slip-forming of the concrete parapet. Its parapet is thicker than that of the
C4(S) rail, from which its design is derived.
TxDOT considers this railing equal in strength to railings of like geometry that have been crash
tested and approved for TL-3 use.
Profile Description
This railing is 42 inches high with a 24-inch concrete parapet and a steel ellipse 18 inches
above the concrete. It also includes a 2-inch pedestrian pipe rail between the parapet and the
steel ellipse to be used on the sidewalk side of the rail. It has twin one-inch cut-plate posts
spaced a maximum of 10 ft. apart. It features a bolt anchorage system for the steel rail posts
that may be drilled and epoxy-anchored allowing slip-forming of the concrete parapet. Its
parapet is thicker than that of the T4(S) rail, from which its design is derived.
TxDOT considers this railing equal in strength to railings of like geometry that have been crash
tested and approved for TL-3 use.
Profile Description
This railing is 33 inches high with a 9-inch sloped concrete rail parapet and with two steel
ellipses centered at 18 inches and 30 inches above the roadway surface. The steel ellipses
are supported by 1 -inch cut-plate posts spaced a maximum of 8 ft. apart.
The T77 railing has been successfully crash tested for TL-3 use.
NOTE: Significant restrictions based on bridge geometry on the use of this railing are documented
on the T77 standard drawing, posted on the internet at: http://www.dot.state.tx.us/insdtdot/
orgchart/cmd/cserve/standard/bridge-e.htm#Railing.
Profile Description
This railing is a 32-inch high concrete safety-shaped parapet with elliptical heavy steel rail-
ing mounted 18 inches above the concrete. Posts are twin one-inch steel-cut plates and are
spaced a maximum of 8.33 ft. apart. The minimum height of the concrete
parapet after maintenance overlays is 29 in.
NOTE: See standard drawing for overhang requirements.
This railing has had limited use in Texas. It was crash tested in 1984 with an 80,000-lb. semi-truck
at 48 mph and at an angle of impact of 15 degrees. It was approved for TL-5 use after evaluation of
results from the 1984 crash testing. See Figure 2-7, below.
Profile Description
This railing is 42 inches high with a short concrete parapet and steel posts and rails. It has
four pipe rails, with 3-inch standard steel pipe for the top rail and 2-inch standard steel pipe
for the lower rails. Its 5-inch wide steel plate posts are spaced a maximum of 10 ft. apart. Its
minimum height after maintenance overlays is 42 inches.
The PR2 railing is designed for pedestrian loads only. It has not been crash tested and is not
intended for exposure to traffic. If this railing is used on a bridge or culvert, it must be protected
from vehicular impact by an approved bridge railing. See Figure 2-8, below.
Section 4
Concrete Railing
Profile Description
This railing is a 27-inch high continuous concrete parapet. Its minimum height after mainte-
nance overlays is 27 inches.
NOTE: This railing is no longer used for new construction. It
has been superseded for new construction by the T221
railing.
The T201 railing is acceptable for TL-3 use. It has not been crash tested. However, TxDOT consid-
ers it similar in strength and geometry to the T203 railing, which has been successfully crash tested
and approved for TL-3 use. See Figure 2-9, below.
Profile Description
This railing is a 27-inch high continuous concrete parapet and a two-tube steel pipe rail
mounted 42 inches above the ground. Its minimum height after maintenance overlays is 27
inches for the concrete parapet and 42 inches for the pipe rail.
NOTE: This railing is no longer used for new construction. It
has been superseded for new construction by the C221
railing.
The C201 railing is acceptable only for TL-2 use (a design speed of 45 mph or less) because its pipe
rail presents an occupant compartment intrusion threat to high speed vehicular traffic. See Figure 2-
10, below.
Profile Description
This railing is 63 inches high with a 27-inch high concrete parapet supporting a chain link
fence. Its 2-inch diameter standard pipe posts are spaced a maximum of 8 ft. apart. Its mini-
mum height after maintenance overlays has not yet been established.
NOTE: This railing is no longer used for new construction. It
has been superseded for new construction by the B221
railing.
The B201 railing is designed for bicycle and pedestrian loads only. It has not been crash tested and
is not intended for exposure to vehicular traffic.
Profile Description
This railing is 27 inches high with a continuous concrete top beam 14 inches high by 13.5
inches wide on 13-inch high concrete posts that are 5 ft. long and spaced a maximum of 10
ft. apart. Its minimum height after maintenance overlays is 27 inches. This railing is
not recommended for direct connectors or flyovers.
The T203 railing was successfully crash tested in 1998 and approved for TL-3 use. See Figure 2-11,
below.
Profile Description
This railing is identical to the type T203 railing but with a two-tube steel pipe rail mounted
at 42 inches. Its total minimum height after maintenance overlays is 27 inches for the con-
crete rail and 42 inches for the pipe rail.
The C203 railing is acceptable for only TL-2 use (a design speed of 45 mph or less) because its pipe
rail presents an occupant compartment intrusion threat to high speed vehicular traffic. The C203 is
usually mounted on a raised sidewalk attached to a bridge deck.
Profile Description
This railing is a 32-inch high continuous parapet. Its parapet is taller and thicker than that of
the T201 railing from which its design is derived allowing optional use of welded wire
reinforcement.
TxDOT considers this railing equal in strength to railings of like geometry that have been crash
tested and approved for TL-3 use.
Profile Description
This railing is a 32-inch high continuous parapet with a single pipe rail mounted 42 inches
above the roadway surface. It features a bolt anchorage system for the steel rail posts that
may be drilled and epoxy-anchored allowing slip-forming of the concrete parapet. Its para-
pet is taller and thicker than that of the C201 rail, from which its design is derived, allowing
for optional use of welded wire reinforcement.
The C221 railing is acceptable for only TL-2 use (a design speed of 45 mph or less) because the
pipe rail presents an occupant compartment intrusion threat to high speed vehicular traffic.
Profile Description
This rail is 68 inches high with a 32-inch high concrete parapet supporting a chain link
fence. Its parapet is taller and thicker than that of the B201 rail from which its design is
derived.
The B221 railing is designed for bicycle and pedestrian loads only. It has not been crash tested and
is not intended for exposure to vehicular traffic.
Profile Description
This railing is a 32-inch high continuous concrete railing that has 6-inch wide windows
spaced every 18 inches, center to center. Its minimum height after maintenance overlays has
not yet been established.
The T411 railing was crash tested in 1989 with a 4,500-lb. large car at 60 mph and at an angle of
impact of 25 degrees. Later tests with a 4,409-lb. pickup truck at 60 mph and at an angle of impact
of 25 degrees did not pass due to unacceptable occupant compartment intrusion. Therefore, this
railing is not to be used in high-speed areas.
This railing is acceptable for TL-2 use (a design speed of 45 mph or less). See Figure 2-12, below.
Profile Description
This railing is a 42-inch high continuous concrete railing that has 6-inch wide windows
spaced every 18 inches, center to center. Its minimum height after maintenance overlays is
42 inches.
Like the T411 railing type, this rail is acceptable for only TL-2 use (a design speed of 45 mph or
less). See Figure 2-13, below.
Profile Description
This railing is a 32-inch high concrete safety-shaped parapet. Its minimum height after
maintenance overlays is 29 inches.
This rail has been approved for TL-4 use after evaluation of results from successful crash testing
based on criteria that predate NCHRP Report 350. See Figure 2-14, below.
Profile Description
This railing is a T501 concrete railing with a 7 -inch thick vertical wall attached to the top
of the T501 railing. The total railing height is 8 feet; however, a 6-foot version is available.
This railing is designed for use on bridges and on pavement. The minimum height of the
lower safety-shaped parapet after maintenance overlays is 29 inches.
NOTE: No standard drawings are available for this railing.
Working drawings in heights up to 10 ft. are available
from the Bridge Division.
The T501SW railing was successfully crash tested in 2000 and approved for TL-4 use. See Figure
2-15, below.
Profile Description
This railing is a 32-inch high concrete safety-shaped parapet that has a single steel pipe rail
mounted 10 inches above the concrete. The minimum height after maintenance overlays is
42 inches.
The C501 railing is acceptable for only TL-2 use (a design speed of 45 mph or less) because its pipe
rail presents an occupant compartment intrusion threat to high speed vehicular traffic. See Figure 2-
16, below.
Profile Description
This railing is a 32-inch high concrete safety-shaped parapet with multiple drain slots. Its
minimum height after maintenance overlays is 29 inches.
Profile Description
This railing is a 32-inch high concrete safety-shaped parapet that has a single steel pipe rail
mounted 10 inches above the concrete and that has multiple drain slots. The minimum
height after maintenance overlays is 42 inches.
The C502 railing is acceptable for only TL-2 use (a design speed of 45 mph or less).
Profile Description
This railing is a 32-inch precast concrete safety-shaped parapet bolted to the slab with bolts
spaced 4.5 ft. apart. Its minimum height after maintenance overlays is 29 inches.
The T503 railing is acceptable for TL-4 use because TxDOT considers the T503 railing equal in
strength and performance to the T501 railing, which has been approved for TL-4 use. Permanent
installation of the T503 railing on a deck thinner than 8 in. is not recommended.
Profile Description
This railing is a 32-inch high precast concrete safety-shaped parapet bolted directly to a
5-in. minimum slab on prestressed box beam and slab beam structures and double-T beams
with bolts spaced about 4.5 ft. apart, center to center. Its minimum height after maintenance
overlays is 29 inches.
The T504 railing is acceptable for TL-4 use because TxDOT considers the T504 railing equal in
strength and performance to the T501 railing, which has been approved for TL-4 use.
Profile Description
This railing is 36 inches high with a concrete parapet that has a single front slope. Its mini-
mum height after maintenance overlays is 32 inches.
This railing was crash tested as a median barrier in 1990 with a 4,409-lb. pickup truck at 62 mph
and at an angle of 25 degrees. This railing was approved for TL-3 use after evaluation of results
from the 1990 crash testing. See Figure 2-17, below.
Profile Description
This railing is 90 inches high with a 48-inch high safety-shaped parapet and a 21-inch high
concrete beam mounted on 21-inch high concrete posts. Its minimum height after mainte-
nance overlays has not yet been established.
This railing has had only one use in Texas. It was crash tested in 1983 with an 80,000-lb. tank truck
at 50 mph and at an angle of impact of 15 degrees. This railing was approved for TL-6 use after
evaluation of results from the 1983 crash testing. See Figure 2-18, below.
NOTE: This railing is intended to protect highly vulnerable sites beneath a bridge. Additional
bridge girders must be placed close to the edge of the bridge deck to support the weight
and impact requirements of this rail.
Contents:
Section 1 Overview
Section 2 Bridge Railing Retrofit Guidelines
Section 3 Railing on Historic Bridges
Section 4 Bridge Railing Design Exceptions
Section 1
Overview
Introduction
For more than a decade, Texas has promoted highway planning that replaces or upgrades railing on
existing bridges to current standards, or that at least increases the strength of railing on existing
bridges.
TxDOT has developed a range of procedures for retrofitting existing structures with railing types
that have performed well and are reasonably economic to install. Procedures for retrofitting bridge
railing on existing structures are published with the TxDOT Bridge Railing Standards.
Section 2
Bridge Railing Retrofit Guidelines
FHWA Policy
The Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) requires that bridge railing on the National High-
way System (NHS) meet requirements of NCHRP Report 350:
...all new or replacement safety features on the NHS covered by the guidelines in the
NCHRP Report 350 that are included in projects advertised for bids or are included in
work done by force-account or by State forces on or after October 1, 1998, are to have
been tested and evaluated and found acceptable in accordance with the guidelines in the
NCHRP Report 350.1
However, FHWA softens this requirement somewhat by allowing exceptions at the discretion of
state transportation agencies:
Bridge railings tested and found acceptable under other guidelines may be acceptable for use
on the NHS. This is a specific reference to the Horne memo titled Crash Testing of Bridge
Railings.2
The FHWA does not intend that this requirement (that new safety features installed on the
NHS be proven crash worthy in accordance with the guidelines in the NCHRP Report 350)
result in the replacement or upgrading of any existing installed features beyond what would
normally occur with planned highway improvements. This statement is qualified by a require-
ment that states have a rational, documented policy for determining when an existing non-
standard feature should be upgraded.
A transportation agency shall define when extensions, relocation, adjustments, or major
repairs to a feature constitute a new installation. In addition, for 3R projects, ...features that
meet the acceptance requirements recommended in NCHRP Report 230, at the discretion of
the transportation agency, may remain in place.3
Texas Policy
Texas is moving toward full implementation of NCHRP Report 350 crash-test criteria for bridge
railing, and Texas policy is to bring all bridge railing to current standards on bridges that are being
widened or rehabilitated. TxDOT is required to evaluate bridge railing for conformance to current
standards whenever any improvements are made to any bridge or its approach roadway. An existing
obsolete railing within a safety improvement project must be brought up to current standards, or
else the project must obtain a design exception, providing that railing replacement is scheduled
within a reasonable time. Bridge Division staff members are available to advise districts on options.
Minimum heights for most bridge railing types are documented in Chapter 2, Obsolete Railing on
Existing Bridges, minimum heights for railing types with no documented minimum height are cur-
rently under review. Minimum railing heights must be maintained, even during subsequent bridge
maintenance overlays, which should be tapered at a maximum 1 to 10 slope over the width of
the shoulder to zero depth at the rail. If minimum rail height cannot be achieved
with tapering the overlay, the rail height must be increased to its
minimum. The Bridge Division is available to assist when details
for raising rail heights are required.
Measure bridge railing height at its inside face from its top to the top of the bridge deck surface.
In a pavement overlay project that includes a bridge, existing bridge railing that does not comply
with NCHRP Report 350 may remain in place under the following conditions:
It complies with NCHRP Report 230 requirements. The following railing types meet NCHRP
Report 230 requirements:
z Earlier versions of NCHRP-350 compliant railing, with the exception of T4 and C4. (Var-
ious versions of T4 with an 18-inch tall concrete parapet are considered compliant.
However, versions of the T4 rails built with a 12-inch tall concrete parapet are not compli-
ant. Those rails were usually built before 1967.)
z T2 or T201, which predate the T221.
z T202, which predates the T203.
z T5, which predates the T501 series. For this railing, the first 3 feet from the end of the rail
should be tapered in a similar manner to the current T501.
It will meet minimum height requirements for that railing type, where the heights are estab-
lished, after the overlay project.
Tapering the overlay down to the toe of the rail over a short distance to achieve a minimum rail
height is not permitted. At least 10 feet of flat (1V: 10 H or flatter) pavement must exist in front
of the railing.
In general, bridge railing upgrade is not required in the following types of overlay projects:
The project is built under TxDOTs preventive maintenance (or 2R) project design criteria.
The project is built under 3R project design criteria and has a design exception if the bridge is
on a high-volume (greater than 1,500 average daily traffic) roadway or a design waiver if the
bridge is on a low-volume (1,500 or less average daily traffic) roadway.
For more information on TxDOTs project design criteria, see the TxDOT online Roadway Design
Manual. Bridge Division staff members are available to advise districts on requirements for spe-
cific projects.
Transition Upgrades
When roadway guard fence is upgraded but existing bridge railing will remain in place, customized
bridge-rail-to-guard-fence transitions may be required. Bridge Division staff members are available
to advise districts on options.
Recommendations
As part of the planning for a bridge that will be widened or rehabilitated, consider the following
aspects of the project in the selection of a retrofit railing:
Elements of the bridge structure
Characteristics of the bridge location
Features of the retrofit designs.
Bridge Structure. Review details of the slab and curb reinforcement of the existing bridge to deter-
mine if the slab edge is capable of being retrofitted with an adequate new railing. Details of
particular importance include the following:
Slab thickness
Curb width and height and reinforcement
Bridge abutment wingwall conditions.
Evaluate the effect of a full-strength retrofit on the shoulder width of the bridge to ensure that a
reduction in effective shoulder width or in sight distances at adjacent intersections will not increase
the accident rate. Also consider the following:
Bridge width, alignment, and grade
Type, aesthetics, and strength of existing railing
Bridge length and its potential for posting speed limits.
Location. Evaluate details of the location, such as the following, and consider their effect on selec-
tion of a retrofit railing:
Bridge structures height above lower terrain or waterway
Approach roadways width, alignment, and grade
Position of adjacent streets and their average daily traffic
Bridge design speed, average daily traffic, and percentage of truck traffic
Accident history on the bridge.
Potential Retrofit Design. Carefully review details of potential retrofit designs, such as the follow-
ing, and consider their effect on selection of a retrofit railing:
Notes
1 August 28, 1998, memorandum from Henry H. Rentz on the subject of National Cooperative Highway Research
Program (NCHRP) Report 350 Hardware Compliance Dates.
2 May 30, 1997, memorandum from Dwight Horne on the subject of Crash Testing of Bridge Railings.
3 August 28, 1998, memorandum from Henry H. Rentz on the subject of National Cooperative Highway Research
Program (NCHRP) Report 350 Hardware Compliance Dates.
Section 3
Railing on Historic Bridges
Additional Guidelines
Federal law protects historically significant bridges, and any rehabilitation or improvement projects
on them require special attention. Bridges that are designated historic and that are listed or eligible
to be listed in the National Register of Historic Places introduce a special railing challenge because
the appearance of the bridge may be protected even though the historic railing may not meet current
standards. As soon as a project is determined to involve a historically significant bridge, the district
should contact the TxDOT Bridge Division, as directed in the Bridge Divisions Historic Bridge
Manual. The director of the Texas Historical Commission is the designated State Historic Preserva-
tion Officer (SHPO) for Texas, and the SHPO and TxDOT are responsible for determining what
effect any proposed project will have on a historic bridge.
Original railing on a historic bridge is likely not to meet current crash-test requirements. It also is
likely not to meet current standards for railing height (a minimum of 27 inches) and for limits on
the size of openings in the railing (small enough that a 6-inch sphere cannot pass through them).
Options for upgrading the railing on historic bridges usually include the following:
Place an approved traffic railing inboard of the existing railing, leaving the existing railing in
place. This is sometimes appropriate when a pedestrian walkway exists on or is planned for the
bridge.
Replace the existing railing with an acceptable approved railing. Possible close matches
include Types T401, T402, or C402 and T411 or C411.
Remove the current railing and incorporate it into a new acceptable railing. This may be appro-
priate in rare instances where an existing railing is especially decorative.
Design a special railing to match the appearance of the existing railing. It may not be necessary
to crash test the new railing if the geometry and calculated strength equal or exceed a crash-
tested railing.
Section 4
Bridge Railing Design Exceptions
Rarely but occasionally, an upgrade to railing on an existing structure could degrade rather than
improve bridge safety. A District should consult with the Bridge Division about a possible design
exception if it is planning a bridge-widening or rehabilitation project in which raising the railing to
meet current standards will reduce overall safety. Factors to consider include the following:
Design speed of traffic in the bridge location.
Resistance to impact of the existing railing.
Whether the bridge ends are intersections protected by stop signs or stop lights.
Whether the geometry is straight into, along, and out of the bridge.
Whether traffic on the bridge is one-way or two-way.
Accident history on the bridge, including damages to and repairs of the railing.
Risk of fall over the side of the bridge.
Whether the bridge has a lower roadway.
Whether a railing upgrade will further narrow an already narrow lane width.
Contents:
Section 1 Overview
Section 2 Recommended Temporary Railing
Section 1
Overview
Introduction
Temporary bridge railing is installed on existing bridges during widening and on new bridges dur-
ing stage construction.
AASHTO has no specific design criteria for the required strength of temporary bridge railing. The
AASHTO Roadside Design Guide1 broadly states that temporary longitudinal barriers are usu-
ally justified for bridge widening and to separate two-way traffic on a normally divided roadway.
Texas is moving toward full implementation of NCHRP Report 3502, which provides two occupant
hazard tests for what it classifies as work zone traffic control devices:
TL-2: 1973-lb. small car at 43 mph and at an angle of impact of 20 degrees.
TL-3: 1973-lb. small car at 62 mph and at an angle of impact of 20 degrees.
Report 350 states that for Test Level 3, tests should be conducted at speeds between 22 and 62
mph if there is a reasonable potential for such tests to be more critical than those recommended.
Because penetration of temporary bridge railing is a critical concern, assume that the required test
for TL-3 should be at 62 mph.
Report 350 does not specify a strength test for work zone traffic control devices.
The following site- and project-specific factors influence the selection of appropriate temporary
bridge railing:
Traffic volume and mix (for example, percentage of truck traffic)
Posted speed within the work zone
Width of temporary lanes, number of lanes, and shoulder width if any
Alignment of the bridge (that is, curves and grades)
Duration of construction.
Notes
1 Roadside Design Guide (AASHTO Task Force for Roadside Safety), 1996
2 National Cooperative Highway Research Program (NCHRP) Report 350, Recommended Procedures
for the Safety Performance Evaluation of Highway Features.
Section 2
Recommended Temporary Railing
For temporary railing, TxDOT recommends the single-slope concrete barriers (SSCB) or the F-
shaped concrete barriers (CSB) detailed in the Roadway Standard drawings. You may use existing
precast safety-shaped traffic barriers such as the concrete traffic barrier (CTB), also found in the
Roadway Standard drawings. Other acceptable temporary railings include the T503 or, for design
speeds of 45 mph or less, the T6 railing.
Available railing slide space should influence a decision whether to anchor the barrier: crash-test
vehicle performance is better with the unanchored barrier; however, unanchored barriers can pose a
threat to lower roadways. TxDOT does not recommend using unanchored precast safety-shaped
traffic barriers unless at least two feet of slide space is available behind them to allow the energy of
an impact to be absorbed by the change in momentum of the barrier mass. See the Roadway Stan-
dard drawing CSB(7)-04 for details to anchor CSB, and standard drawing
PCTB(3)-94 for details to anchor CTB.
Length of the construction area can also be a factor in selection of this railing. If barrier segments
are 30 feet long, they can be connected easily with only nominal equipment. However, to perform
adequately as a temporary railing, 10-ft. segments require significant connection in the form of
dowels, cables, bolted lap splices, and so on. Most Texas precast barriers are in 30-ft. segments, and
TxDOT generally discourages use of shorter segments for temporary bridge railing.
Contents:
Section 1 Overview
Section 2 Bridge Railing for Pedestrians
Section 3 Bridge Railing for Bicyclists
Section 4 ADA Requirements for Bridge Railing
Section 1
Overview
Introduction
Bridges that support non-vehicular traffic must meet special railing requirements. The following
sections outline special requirements for the following:
Bridge railing for pedestrians.
Bridge railing for bicyclists.
ADA requirements for bridge railing.
Section 2
Bridge Railing for Pedestrians
FHWA Policy
A vehicular bridge with a design speed of 45 mph or less is considered a low-speed facility, and it
does not require a separator railing if pedestrians use it. A bridge with a design speed above 45 mph
is a high-speed facility, and it must have a separator railing if pedestrians use it. A 1996 memoran-
dum from the FHWA Division Office to the TxDOT Design Division established these definitions2
(Ref. A-7).
Texas Policy
Combination Railing. Combination railing is designed for use on the outside of raised sidewalks
when no separator railing is used on a facility with design speeds of 45 mph or less. It is sometimes
used, though not typically required, as separator railing between traffic on a high- or low-speed
facility and an at-grade sidewalk.
NOTE: Only Combination Railing Types C402 and C4(S) are currently approved for use on a high
speed facility.
Openings between horizontal or vertical members on pedestrian railing must be small enough that a
6-inch sphere cannot pass through them in the lower 27 inches. For the portion of pedestrian railing
that is higher than 27 inches, openings may be spaced such that an 8-inch sphere cannot pass
through them.
Separator Railing. Separator railing may be appropriate on lower speed bridges that are close to
schools or that have significant pedestrian traffic. Sites should be evaluated on a case-by-case basis.
When using a separator railing, attach a metal-beam guard fence and terminate it at the edge of the
roadway shoulder, letting pedestrians walk behind the guard fence. If needed, a crash cushion can
be used to absorb railing end impact energy. A curb will adversely affect the performance of a bar-
rier terminal.
Containment Fences and Cages. Some pedestrian-use bridges and walkways may pose a threat to
vehicles or trains from vandals throwing objects; such bridges and walkways may have a protective
containment cage for the pedestrians. It is a local or railroad company decision about whether a
fence or containment cage is required at a particular site. Full containment cages on Texas bridges
require minimum headroom for all walks and tunnels of 8 ft; more headroom may be required
based on the needs of users.
Although they are not maintained as standards, details of various fences and containment cages are
available as working drawings from the Bridge Division.
Pedestrian-only Railing. Railing for pedestrian-only bridges in Texas must comply with the
geometry and strength requirements of current AASHTO LRFD Bridge Design Specification2
(Ref. A-5). Pedestrian railing openings between horizontal or vertical members must be small
enough that a 6-inch sphere cannot pass through them in the lower 27 inches. For the portion of
pedestrian railing that is higher than 27 inches, openings may be spaced such that an 8-inch sphere
cannot pass through them.
Notes
1 Harley, D. E., Sidewalks on Bridges, Memo to TxDOT Design Division, FHWA Texas Division,
November 26, 1996
2 AASHTO LRFD Bridge Design Specification, American Association of State Highway and Trans-
portation Officials (AASHTO), Third Edition (2004)
Section 3
Bridge Railing for Bicyclists
Texas Policy
In Texas, any bridge that is specifically designated for bicycle traffic must have appropriate railing
for bicyclists. Texas has adopted the AASHTO LRFD Bridge Design Specifications reference 2
requirement that railing of bridges that are designated for bicycle traffic should be a minimum of 54
inches high with the same restrictions on openings as for pedestrian railing.
Section 4
ADA Requirements for Bridge Railing
Neither the FHWA nor AASHTO have issued specific ADA requirements for bridge railing. How-
ever, all Texas ramps, railing, and bridges that may be accessed by those with disabilities must be
designed to meet current ADA requirements.
Handrails
ADA handrails are required on both sides of ramps. ADA handrails for ramps must be centered
between 34 inches and 38 inches above the walkway surface. The diameter of the handrail must be
1.25-to-1.50 inches, with 1.50 inches of space from behind the handrail to any vertical surface.
Index
A revision history 1-2
approval level metal and concrete railing 2-3, 2-9
concrete railing 2-3 metal railing 2-2, 2-6
metal and concrete railing 2-3
metal railing 2-2 N
approval of railing 1-7 NCHRP Report 230 1-5
NCHRP Report 350 1-5
B new construction, railing no longer used 2-4
B201 railing 2-16
B221 railing 2-18 O
bicycle-traffic railing 5-5 occupant-hazard protection 4-2
open railing 2-5
C overlay project 3-4
C railing types 2-4
C201 railing 2-16 P
C203 railing 2-17 pedestrian-only railing 5-4
C221 railing 2-18 policy
C4 (S) railing 2-10 FHWA 1-4
C402 railing 2-11 Texas
C501 railing 2-23 approval of railing 1-7
C502 railing 2-24 culverts 1-8
combination railing 5-3 existing bridges 1-7
concrete railing 2-3, 2-15 new bridges 1-7
containment fences and cages 5-3 railing transitions 1-7
crash tests 1-5 PR1 railing 2-8
culverts 1-8 PR2 railing 2-14
D R
design exceptions 3-8 railing
bicycle-traffic 5-5
F combination 5-3
FHWA policy 1-4 concrete 2-3, 2-15
design exceptions 3-8
H historic bridges 3-7
historic bridge railing 3-7 metal 2-2, 2-6
HT railing 2-13 metal and concrete 2-3, 2-9
open 2-5
M pavement overlay projects 3-4
manual pedestrian-only 5-4
feedback 1-3 retrofits 3-3
organization 1-2 separator 5-3
purpose 1-2 temporary 4-2
transition upgrades 3-5
S
separator railing 5-3
sound walls 2-4
SSTR railing 2-25
T
T101 railing 2-6
T201 railing 2-15
T203 railing 2-17