STUDY OF SAFETY

BARRIERS AND THEIR

DESIGN METHODOLOGY
YATIN MAINI 20123003
UMANG JAISWAL 20124116
RAFA MAHZABEEN 20123128

PROJECT SUPERVISOR : Dr. A.K. UPADHYAY

OBJECTIVE

Study of existing safety barriers .

Analysis of Rollover event between test vehicle and Rigid and

Semi-Rigid barrier.

Some modifications in the existing barriers if possible.

OUTER LAYER(METAL FOAM) DENSITY
VARIATION WITH CONSTANT
THICKNESS.
RESULTS INITIAL CONDITIONS:

BUS VELOCITY : 2240

mm/sec along negative y and
positive x axis.

BARRIER fixed support from

bottom

BUS material structural

steel

BARRIER material
Concrete density:
2300kg/m^3
Outer layer(metal foam)
density:
300/400/450 kg/m^3
Outer layer(metal foam)
Thickness : 20 mm
Analysis time 0.008 sec
TOTAL DEFORMATION
 TOTAL DEFORMATION

400 kg/m^3 450 kg/m^3

300 kg/m^3

INFERENCE: With increase

in density of metal foam
layer keeping thickness
fixed, maximum magnitude
of total deformation
increases.

Aluminium layer
Directional deformation
 Directional deformation

450 kg/m^3
300 kg/m^3 400 kg/m^3

INFERENCE: With increase

in density of metal foam
layer keeping thickness
fixed, maximum magnitude
of directional deformation
increases.

Aluminium Layer
Equivalent Stress
 Equivalent Stress

300 kg/m^3 400 kg/m^3 450 kg/m^3

INFERENCE: With increase in

density of metal foam layer
keeping thickness fixed, maximum
magnitude of equivalent stress
induced in bus decreases.

Aluminium Layer
Total Acceleration
 Total Acceleration

300 kg/m^3 400 kg/m^3 450 kg/m^3

INFERENCE: With increase

in density of metal foam
layer keeping thickness
fixed, maximum magnitude
of total acceleration
decreases.

Aluminium layer
OUTER LAYER (METAL
FOAM)THICKNESS VARIATION WITH
CONSTANT DENSITY.
RESULTS INITIAL CONDITIONS:

BUS VELOCITY : 2240

mm/sec along negative y and
positive x axis.

BARRIER fixed support from

bottom

BUS material structural

steel

BARRIER material
Concrete density:
2300kg/m^3
Outer layer(metal foam)
density:
300 kg/m^3
Outer layer(metal foam)
Thickness : 10/15 mm
Analysis time 0.008 sec
Total Deformation
 Total Deformation

10 mm 15 mm

INFERENCE: With increase in thickness of metal foam layer keeping density fixed , maximum magnitude of
Total deformation of barrier decreases
Directional Deformation
 Directional Deformation

10 mm 15 mm

INFERENCE: With increase in thickness of metal foam layer keeping density fixed , maximum magnitude of
directional deformation of barrier decreases.
Equivalent Stress
 Equivalent Stress

10 mm 15 mm

INFERENCE: With increase in thickness of metal foam layer keeping density fixed, maximum magnitude of
equivalent stress induced in bus decreases.
Total Acceleration
 Total Acceleration

15 mm
10 mm

INFERENCE: With increase in thickness of metal foam layer keeping density fixed , maximum magnitude
of Total Acceleration decreases.
 CONCLUSION

Road accidents due to rollover are very frequent and can be controlled to a certain extent by
optimum design and utilisation of road side safety barriers.

Existing design of road side safety barrier can be modified either by change in material or by
change in its geometry.

Change in material, involving a layer of metallic foam over a conventional rigid barrier results in
significant reduction in deformation in road side safety barrier.

This decrease in deformation increases with decrease in density of metallic foam keeping its
thickness fixed, and with increase in thickness keeping its density fixed.
 Bibliography

DIER- Safety Barriers Design Guide.

AASHTO (American Association Of State Highway and

Transport Officials) 2002.

ROLLOVER CRASH ANALYSIS OF THE RTV .

Physics of Automobile Rollovers by L. David Roper

Impact and energy absorption of portable water filled road

safety barrier system fitted with foam.
 Why this Topic ?
When drivers lose control and leave the road there is a risk of injury and damage due to
collisions with:

unyielding objects (e.g. trees and poles)

non-traversable features (e.g. drains, berms or rough surfaces)

that may cause the vehicle to vault (i.e. become airborne), rollover over or stop abruptly.
 INDIAN ROADS AND ACCIDENTS
1214 road crashes occur every day in India.

377 people die every day, equivalent to a jumbo jet crashing every day.

20 children under the age of 14 die every day due to road crashes in the country.

Two people die every hour in Uttar Pradesh State with maximum number of road crash deaths with Kanpur,
Lucknow and Agra among TOP 10 cities with highest number of road crash death.

Source: National Crime Records Bureau, Ministry of Road Transport & Highway, Law commission of India, Global status
report on road safety 2013
 INTRODUCTION
TO
SAFETY BARRIERS
A safety barrier prevents passage of vehicles into a dangerous area. It is commonly used to mitigate risk of vehicle
vaulting, rollover and crash with near by hazards.

Types of Safety Barrier

Flexible Barrier Systems : Semi Rigid Systems: Rigid Barrier Systems:

These are Wire Rope System These include steel beam They are a reinforced
which provide large attached to blockouts and
deflection. are supported on steel or concrete wall
wooden posts. constructed to a profile
and height that is
designed to contain and
redirect errant vehicles.
Factors to be Considered before selecting Safety Barriers:
1)Performance Capability :
The initial determination that needs to be made is the level of containment that the barrier has to provide i.e.
the traffic volume
critical site features
consequences of barrier penetration

2)Deflection and Clearance :

Rigid barriers have negligible dynamic deflection under impact. On the other hand, semi-rigid and flexible barriers can
have significant dynamic deflection under vehicle impact. So, amount of clearance available plays a key role in deciding
barrier type.

3)Cost :
The selection of a barrier should consider the life cycle cost of the systems and their safety performance, including injury
and property damage costs, and maintenance costs.
4)Maintenance :
Maintenance factors includes :
routine maintenance of the barrier itself
impact repair
effect of the barrier on adjacent road and roadside maintenance (pavement overlays, etc.)
material and component storage requirements.

5)Environmental Impact :
Environmental factors that may require consideration include:
barriers that have a larger frontage area may contribute to a build up of drifting snow or sand, thereby
affecting operation of the road
the use of certain preservatives in some wooden barriers or barriers that have wooden components may be an
issue
some types of railing may deteriorate rapidly in highly corrosive environment.
 SAFETY BARRIERS DESIGN
FLEXIBLE BARRIER SYSTEMS :

Flexible (Wire Rope) Barrier Systems comprise wire ropes (generally 3 or 4 cables) supported on weak posts that are
installed primarily to support them. The wire ropes are anchored at each end and can be anchored at intervals along the
barrier, and tensioned.
DESIGN FEATURES:

The upper cable is typically 580-720 mm above ground level.

Posts are of a particular cross-sectional shape, their function is to support the cables and to dissipate
some of the energy of vehicle impacts through deformation.

A typical post spacing is 2.5 m or 3.2 m .Where it is desired to reduce deflection of the wire rope system a
smaller post spacing (1.2 m) may be used.

Steel posts may be placed in concrete sockets that allow easy withdrawal of the posts when they are
damaged.
SEMI- RIGID BARRIER SYSTEMS:
The forms of semi-rigid barrier that have been commonly used are W-Beam steel barrier and double W-Beam
steel barrier.

W-Beam steel barrier :

It consists of a steel beam of W-shape cross-section attached to blockouts supported on posts.
DESIGN FEATURES:

The W-Beam is widely used as a general purpose system in speed zones up to 110 km/h where the design vehicle is not a
truck .

In systems using steel C channel for both posts and block outs have been found
Useful with post spacing of 2 m.

The W-Beam first bends and then flattens out forming a wide tension band to contain the impacting vehicle .

The barrier deflection lessens the rate of change of momentum of the impacting vehicle and its occupants and this can
significantly reduce vehicle damage and personal injury.
Double W-Beam steel barrier :

The Double-W-Beam is intended for locations where:

barrier is regularly hit
where there is a higher probability that it will be impacted by heavy vehicles.

DESIGN FEATURES

The Double-W-Beam barrier is stiffer than the W-Beam.

This type of rail has two indentations, compared with the one indentation possessed by the W-Beam.
MODIFIED Double W-Beam barrier :

The modification is a steel blockout constructed from a steel section with a triangular notch cut from its
web. This allows the lower portion of the Double-W-Beam and the flange of the blockout to bend when hit
and results in small vehicles being redirected less severely in collisions
W-Beam DOUBLE W-Beam

Modified Double W- Beam

RIGID BARRIER SYSTEMS:
Rigid barriers are generally only used where there is insufficient space to accommodate the
deflections of semi-rigid or flexible barriers, or where there is a need to contain a heavy vehicle.

DESIGN FEATURES:
To satisfactorily contain single unit trucks, buses and other heavier vehicles, a concrete barrier
have a minimum height of about 820 mm.
Articulated trucks (not including tankers) require a barrier height of 1070 mm.

Types of Rigid Barrier Systems:

1) Vertical Wall Barrier

2) Single Slope Barrier
3) F-type Barrier
VERTICAL WALL BARRIER

Vertical concrete barriers do not lift the vehicle and hence do not have the energy management feature .

Vehicle damage in crashes with a vertical wall is greater .

In a crash with a vertical wall all four wheels remain on the ground and this minimises the potential for vehicles to
rollover over .

The trajectory of cars after they crash into vertical

walls is also uncertain because wheel damage may
occur as the axle contacts the barrier.

They are suitable in situations where road width is

highly constrained .
Single Slope Barrier:

For shallow-angle impacts the shape is intended to minimise sheet metal body damage by allowing the vehicle
tyres to ride up on the lower sloped face.

Energy is dissipated by lifting and lowering of the vehicle, compression of the vehicle suspension and
deformation of the body of the vehicle .

However, excessive lifting of the vehicle may cause

it to yaw, pitch or roll during contact with the barrier,
and to rollover when the tyres contact the road again.

Single slope barriers facilitate pavement resurfacing

without the profile being adversely affected.
F Type Barrier

F Type barrier has a similar profile to Single slope barrier.

The main difference being that the height of the lower sloped surface is less.

This significantly reduces the lifting of an impacting vehicle, resulting in a reduced tendency for vehicles to roll,
particularly small cars.
Activities for remaining part of the semester

Analysis of Rollover conditions.

Analysis of Crash Condition Between test Vehicle and Barrier.

Bibliography

DIER- Safety Barriers Design Guide.

AASHTO (American Association Of State Highway and Transport Officials) 2002.

 ROLL OVER
ROLLOVER may be defined as an event in which vehicle over turns.

Following are two types of idealized rollover situations:

A vehicle is moving (sliding) sideways and the wheels strike a solid obstacle that provides
a pivot point for a possible rollover.

A vehicle is moving, without slipping, around a circular curve at a constant speed high
enough to cause rollover.
RIGID BARRIER ROLLOVER ANALYSIS
INITIAL CONDITIONS:

BUS VELOCITY : 2240 mm/sec along

negative z and positive y axis.

BARRIER fixed support from bottom

BUS material structural steel

BARRIER material concrete

Analysis time 0.002 sec

 RESULTS
DIRECTIONAL DEFORMATION
INFERENCE:

The directional change in position of bus

is in negative z axis of bus which suggests
the rollover of bus.

The change in slope of deformation vs

time graph indicates repetitive contact
with the barrier
TOTAL DEFORMATION
INFERENCE:

The roof of the bus having

maximum change in position
suggests occurrence of
rollover.
EQUIVALENT (Von-Mises) Stress
INFERENCE:

The multiple peaks of equivalent

stress suggests repetitive contact
between bus and barrier.

The negligible stress induced in

barrier suggests it to be safe from
design point of view.
SEMI-RIGID BARRIER ROLLOVER ANALYSIS

INITIAL CONDITIONS:

BUS VELOCITY : 2240 mm/sec along negative

y and positive x axis.

BARRIER fixed support from rear

BUS material structural steel

BARRIER material structural steel

Analysis time 0.002 sec

 RESULTS
Directional Deformation
INFERENCE:

The negative directional change in

position of bus suggests the rollover of
bus.

Small change in slope of deformation vs

time graph indicates single contact with
the barrier

The higher deformation magnitude

(compared to rigid barrier system)
suggests semi- rigid barrier to be more
suitable for light weight vehicles.
TOTAL DEFORMATION
INFERENCE:

The roof of the bus having

maximum total change in position
suggests occurrence of rollover.

The higher deformation

magnitude (compared to rigid
barrier system) suggests semi-rigid
barrier to be more suitable for light
weight vehicles.
Equivalent ( Von- Mises) Stress
INFERENCE:

The single peak of equivalent

stress suggests once a contact
between bus and barrier.

The higher Equivalent stress

magnitude (compared to rigid
barrier system) suggests semi-rigid
barrier to be more suitable for light
weight vehicles.
 Results to be analysed
Total Acceleration Rigid Barrier Total Acceleration Flexible Barrier
Activities for upcoming semester

Thorough study of results obtained.

Modification in the existing design of barriers to reduce rollover

instances.
Bibliography

DIER- Safety Barriers Design Guide.

AASHTO (American Association Of State Highway and Transport Officials) 2002.

ROLLOVER CRASH ANALYSIS OF THE RTV .

Physics of Automobile Rollovers by L. David Roper

 Possible Modifications
Change in Material

Presence of a layer of some energy absorbing material over

existing concrete rigid barrier to absorb some fraction of energy.

Change in Geometry

Change in the existing geometric features of barrier to increase

dissipation of energy.
Work in this semester
So far analysis has been done for two layers having different density values.

Reason :

In future we will be going for layer of energy absorbing material over concrete
barrier.

So, to analyse the effect of layers of different densities, above mentioned

approach has been followed.

Also literature review is going out for the selection of energy absorbing material
in particular.
RESULTS
INITIAL CONDITIONS:

BUS VELOCITY : 2240 mm/sec along

negative y and positive x axis.

BARRIER fixed support from bottom

BUS material structural steel

BARRIER material
Concrete density: 2300kg/m^3
Outer layer density:
1265kg/m^3

Analysis time 0.2 sec

Directional change in position
 Barrier

Bus

Bus

Barrier INFERENCE:

The graph indicates that

the bus has been reflected
back by the barrier.

Also, single peak in graph

suggests one time contact
between bus and barrier.
Total Deformation
Bus

INFERENCE:

Very little change in slope

Barrier again suggests one time
contact between bus and
barrier.
Equivalent Stress
 INFERENCE:
Bus
Single peak in equivalent stress
suggests one time contact between
bus and barrier.

The negligible stress induced in barrier

suggests it to be safe from design
point of view.
Barrier
Total Acceleration

Bus

INFERENCE:

The graph indicates that the bus after

being reflected back by the barrier
decelerates to rest in very less time.
Barrier
Activities for remaining semester

Effect of foam layer thickness.

Effect of foam density.

Bibliography

DIER- Safety Barriers Design Guide.

AASHTO (American Association Of State Highway and Transport Officials) 2002.

ROLLOVER CRASH ANALYSIS OF THE RTV .

Physics of Automobile Rollovers by L. David Roper