Balakrishnan, Vishnu

From: Dave Rankin [Dave.Rankin@D2G.com.au]

Sent: Friday, 1 May 2009 4:13 PM
To: Balakrishnan, Vishnu
Subject: Emailing: Basics of Concrete Barriers

featuring developments in federal highway policies, programs, and research and technology
March/April 2000 Vol. 63 No. 5

Editor's Notes

Along the Road Basics of Concrete Barriers

Internet Watch
by Charles F. McDevitt
Recent
Publications
The basic principles of concrete barriers are not generally known or understood.
Concrete barriers appear to be simple and uncomplicated, but in reality, they are
Calendar
sophisticated safety devices.
NHI Update
Concrete Safety Shapes

When most people think of concrete barriers, they think of the New Jersey Concrete
Order Online Safety Shape Barrier (NJ-shape or Jersey barriers). For the more common shallow-
angle hits, the NJ-shape is intended to minimize sheet metal damage by allowing the
Contact Info vehicle tires to ride up on the lower sloped face. (See figure 1.)

Past Issues For higher

impact angles,
Public Roads the NJ-shape is
Home actually a
multistage
barrier. The
front bumper
impacts the
upper sloped
face and slides
upwards. This
interaction
initiates lifting
of the vehicle. If
the bumper is Figure 1 -- Concrete safety shape profiles.
relatively weak,
the front end starts to crush before any uplift occurs. Then, as the vehicle becomes
more nearly parallel with the barrier, the wheel contacts the lower sloped face. Most of
the additional lift of the vehicle is caused by the lower sloped face compressing the
front suspension. However, wheel side-scrubbing forces provide some additional lift,
1
particularly if the barrier face is rough. Therefore, exposed aggregate and other rough
surface finishes should be avoided. Modern vehicles have relatively short distances
between the bumper and the wheel; as a result, bumper contact is followed almost
immediately by wheel contact.

It is only necessary to lift the vehicle enough to reduce the friction between the tires
and the paved surface. This aides in banking and redirecting the vehicle. If the vehicle
is lifted too high into the air, it may yaw, pitch, or roll, which can cause the vehicle to
roll over when the wheels come in contact with the ground again. Preferably, concrete
safety shape barriers should be adjacent to a paved surface so that the wheels cannot
dig into the soil and cause the vehicle to overturn.

Years ago, it was common practice to form a 255-millimeter (10-inch) radius at the
intersection of the two sloping surfaces to facilitate slipforming the barrier. This radius
is no longer necessary for slipforming. Modern slipforming machines can readily
slipform concrete barriers up to 1320 mm (52 in) in height without a radius.

The 75-mm (3-in) vertical "reveal" at the base of the barrier is only intended to provide
a neat line for asphalt resurfacing. This vertical reveal makes very little change in the
vehicle dynamics because it has about the same effect as hitting a 75-mm curb.

Drainage openings in the face of the reveal do not have a significant effect on an
impacting vehicle. Higher openings should not be used because wheels and bumpers
can interact with them, snagging and causing the vehicle to yaw. Wherever possible,
drainage should be collected along the toe of the barrier because a drainage depression
or curb out in front of a concrete safety shape can cause vehicle instability and lead to
rollover.

The key design parameter

for a safety shape profile is
the distance from the
ground to the slope break
point because this
determines how much the
suspension will be
compressed. For the NJ-
shape, this distance is 330
mm (13 in).

The old General Motors

shape, or GM shape, had a
distance of 380 mm (15 in)
from the ground to the slope
break point. This higher
distance caused excessive
lifting of the small cars of
the 1970s, such as the Figure 2 -- NJ Turnpike Authority's heavy-vehicle
Chevrolet Vega. After median barrier.
impacting the GM shape in
crash tests, these small cars became unstable and tended to roll over. As a result, the
use of the GM shape was discontinued.

A parametric study (systematically varying the parameters) of various profile

configurations that were labeled A through F showed that F performed distinctly better
2
than the NJ-shape. The results of these computer simulations were confirmed by a
series of full-scale crash tests. Configuration F became known as the F-shape.

Even though the performance of the F-shape was superior to the NJ-shape
performance, it was not widely used. This was because the states were well-satisfied
with the NJ-shape, which also met the crash-test criteria. In addition, their contractors
did not want to change profiles because they had a considerable investment in the
forms required to produce the NJ-shape.

As shown in figure 1, the slopes of the F-shape and the NJ-shape are the same. The
major difference is that the distance from the ground to the slope break point of the F-
shape is 255 mm -- 75 mm lower than the NJ-shape. The lower slope break point
significantly reduced the lifting of the vehicle and greatly improved the performance of
the concrete barrier.

The NJ-shape and the F-shape profiles are closely related. If you make a 75-mm
asphalt overlay next to the NJ-shape (and mentally cut a new 75-mm reveal in the
concrete that remains above the asphalt surface), you have converted the NJ-shape into
an F-shape. This means that asphalt resurfacing work can actually convert the NJ-shape
into a safer design. However, these asphalt overlays will reduce the overall height of
the concrete barrier and, consequently, reduce its effectiveness for heavier vehicles.

When a single-unit truck, such as a Ryder or U-Haul rental truck, hits a concrete barrier
in a crash test, it rolls toward the barrier until the underside of the truck bed comes to
rest on the top of the barrier. This stops the roll motion. Then, the vehicle slides along
the top of the barrier until it is redirected upright. For this to occur, the concrete barrier
must have a minimum height of 815 mm (32 in). To contain and redirect an "18-
wheeler" or tractor-trailer in a crash test, a concrete barrier must have a minimum
height of 1070 mm (42 in). In these collisions with trucks, the primary load path is
vertical because the load is transferred from the underside of the truck bed or trailer to
the top of the concrete barrier. A concrete barrier is essentially a short, stocky column
that can easily resist these vertical loads.

Because trucks, buses, and other heavier vehicles tend to slide along the tops of
concrete barriers, it is important to keep the tops of these barriers free of signs, fences,
luminaire supports, and other appurtenances that could snag the vehicle and cause it to
yaw. When it is necessary to provide luminaire supports on concrete median barriers,
the barriers can be made thicker at the top in the vicinity of the luminaire support and
flared out on the sides to provide a smooth lateral transition section for the impacting
vehicle.

High-Performance Concrete Safety Shape Barriers

Higher concrete barriers are sometimes used as truck barriers and to provide an integral
glare screen on concrete median barriers (CMB). The deck of a tractor-trailer is located
about 1350 mm (53 in) above the ground. Because the deck is a strong, stiff structural
member, it can produce significant lateral forces when it impacts a concrete barrier.
Therefore, any concrete barrier that is higher than 1320 mm (52 in) should have some
reinforcement near its top -- if only to prevent spalling concrete from flying into
oncoming traffic. Some states have slipformed concrete glare screens on top of existing
concrete barriers. Usually these concrete glare screens contain some reinforcement to
prevent spalling.

3
The New Jersey Turnpike Authority (NJTA) has
crash-tested and developed a 1070-mm- (42-in-)
high concrete median barrier that can safely
contain and redirect tractor-trailers to an upright
position. This barrier is made with the NJ-shape
forms. The 75-mm vertical reveal is covered up
with asphalt to anchor the barrier against
overturning. (See figure 2.) This turns the barrier
profile into an F-shape that does not have a To contain and redirect a
vertical reveal. The NJTA's Heavy-Vehicle 36,000-kg gasoline tanker after
Median Barrier is 305-mm- (12-in-) thick at the impacts at high angles and
top. It is heavily reinforced. speeds, a 2290-mm (90-in)
concrete barrier is required.
The Ontario Tall Wall is a 1070-mm-high
concrete median barrier with the same profile, but no reinforcing. A crash test with a
36,000-kilogram (80,000-pound) tractor-trailer at 85.3 kilometers per hour (53 miles
per hour) and an impact angle of 15 degrees demonstrated that reinforcing was not
necessary ecause the Ontario Tall Wall is 305 mm at the top. Even though concrete
shrinkage cracks formed vertically approximately every 2440 to 3355 mm (8 to 11
feet) and penetrated completely through the cross section of the barrier, the cross-
sectional area and the aggregate interlock were sufficient to transfer all of the lateral
impact forces across the cracked cross-sections.

The 75-mm-thick asphalt overlays that anchored both sides of these high-performance
median barriers did not separate from the concrete during the crash tests with tractor-
trailers. Other crash tests have shown that 25.4-mm- (1-in-) thick asphalt overlays on
both sides of 815-mm- (32-in-) high concrete median barriers are sufficient to anchor
them for impacts with passenger cars and buses.

Many states use concrete safety shape barriers that are only 150-mm- or 200-mm- (6-
in- or 8-in-) thick at the top. Tractor-trailers can break off a V-shaped piece of concrete
at the construction joints and climb on top of these barriers. However, this is such a
rare occurrence that most states do not find it economically feasible to use thicker
barriers or to increase the reinforcement in the vicinity of the joints.

Gasoline tanker semi-trailers do not have any exposed structural elements between the
wheels and the tank, which is centered about 1980 mm (78 in) above ground. In other
words, there is nothing for the barrier to push on between the wheels and the tank. The
1070-mm wheels can interact with a 1070-mm-high concrete barrier and redirect the
vehicle in shallow-angle impacts. (See figure 2.) However, to contain and redirect a
36,000-kg gasoline tanker after impacts at higher angles and speeds, a higher 2290-mm
(90-in) concrete barrier is required.

Vertical Concrete Parapets

When a concrete safety shape lifts a vehicle, some of the kinetic energy of the vehicle
is converted to potential energy. This potential energy is turned back into kinetic
energy as the vehicle returns to the ground.

Vertical concrete parapet walls do not have this energy management feature, but crash
tests have demonstrated that they can perform acceptably as traffic barriers. All of the
energy absorption in an impact with a rigid vertical wall is due to crushing of the
4
vehicle. Bumpers usually do not slide up vertical concrete walls and lift the vehicle, so
all four wheels tend to stay on the ground. This minimizes the potential for vehicle
rollover. Because the vehicle is not lifted and tilted by the vertical face, this also
increases the possibility of a motorist's head going through a side window and
contacting the vertical barrier.

Vehicle wheels are primarily designed to handle vertical loads, not horizontal loads.
The trajectories of passenger cars after crashing into vertical concrete barriers can be
uncertain because of wheel damage that can occur when the front axle contacts the
barrier.

Constant-Slope Concrete Barriers

The need to have a single-slope

barrier profile that has more
consistent performance than a
vertical-face concrete wall led to
the development of constant-slope
barriers. Both constant-slope
barriers and vertical concrete walls
can facilitate resurfacing because
their performance is insensitive to
the thickness of the asphalt overlay.
This is particularly advantageous
when constructing barriers on
curved ramps and for resurfacing
operations that otherwise would
require resetting concrete safety
shape barriers. Up to 255 mm (10
in) of overlay can be made before
the barrier height is reduced to 815 Figure 3 -- Texas Constant Slope Barrier.
mm (32 in).

The Texas Constant-Slope Barrier is 1070 mm (42 in) high and has a constant-slope
face that makes an angle of 10.8 degrees with respect to the vertical. (See figure 3.) It
was originally tested and developed for use as a temporary concrete barrier, but it has
been widely used as a permanent concrete median barrier.

California developed a constant-slope profile that makes an angle of 9.1 degrees with
respect to the vertical. This is closer to the 6-degree slope on the upper faces of the NJ-
shape and the F-shape. California has used this constant-slope profile for their 1070-
mm-high Type 60 roadside barrier and for their Type 70 bridge rail.

The crash tests indicate that the performance of the Texas Constant-Slope Barrier is
comparable to that of the NJ-shape and the performance of the California Constant-
Slope Barrier is comparable to that of the F-shape. These constant-slope barriers have
both been tested with the 8000-kg (18,000-lb) single-unit truck in accordance with
NCHRP Report 350, and they are both Test Level Four (TL-4) barriers. To date,
constant-slope barriers have not been crash-tested with tractor-trailers or other heavy
vehicles; therefore, their upper performance limits have not been established.

Portable Concrete Barriers

5
Portable concrete barriers (PCBs) have greatly improved safety in construction work
zones. PCBs are made of precast concrete safety shape sections joined together to form
a continuous longitudinal barrier. Because portable concrete barriers are primarily
intended to keep errant vehicles from hitting construction workers, the dynamic lateral
deflection of these barriers must be kept to a minimum. In general, barrier deflection
can be minimized by using longer barrier segments and by using joints that can
develop a bending moment of 6913 kg-m (50 kip-ft) or more.

Pin and loop connections are very popular because

they can readily accommodate horizontal
curvature and changes in vertical grade. However,
they can only develop bending-moment capacity
after the joint has undergone a significant amount
of rotation. A washer or cotter pin at the bottom
end of the steel pin is necessary to prevent the pin
from jumping vertically out of the loops upon
impact. Loops made of reinforcing bars are better
than wire loops because they can resist torsional This 510-mm- (20-in-) high
rotations of the barriers at the joints. Pulling the portable concrete barrier,
barrier segments tight and anchoring the end developed by the Texas
segments to the ground are also very helpful in Department of Transportation,
reducing the lateral deflection. Anchoring each has a reverse slope that is 2.8
barrier segment with steel pins driven into the degrees (1 in 20) with respect to
ground is very effective, but it is labor-intensive the vertical. This low-profile
and makes the barrier less portable. concrete barrier was
successfully crash-tested with a
Low-Profile Concrete Barriers pickup truck at 72 km/h (45
mi/h).
If a sloping face on a concrete barrier can lift a
vehicle, then it stands to reason that a slope in the reverse direction can tend to hold the
vehicle down by pushing the bumper downward. A 510-mm- (20-in-) high portable
concrete barrier has been developed by the Texas Department of Transportation for use
in work zones and intersections in which driver sight distance would be blocked by a
higher barrier. The reverse slope is 2.8 degrees (1 in 20) with respect to the vertical.
This low-profile concrete barrier was successfully crash-tested with a pickup truck at
72 km/h (45 mi/h). It has not been tested at higher speeds or with larger vehicles.

Conclusion

Each of these concrete barrier types fills a niche and helps meet the needs of highway
agencies that select, design, and locate traffic barriers. In terms of safety performance,
the 1070-mm (42-in) F-shape is currently our best technology. The F-shape profile is
clearly superior to the NJ-shape and is gradually being used by more states for both
portable concrete barriers and permanent barriers.

Charles F. McDevitt is a structural engineer in the Federal Highway Administration's

Office of Safety Research and Development at the Turner-Fairbank Highway Research
Center in McLean, Va. He has 39 years experience in designing, testing, and
developing new products. He joined the Federal Highway Administration in 1978. For
the last 22 years, he has worked on developing new and improved traffic barriers. He
has a master's degree in civil engineering from the University of Pennsylvania, and he
is a registered professional engineer in Pennsylvania.
6
Articles & Departments
The Quest for Quality: Pennsylvania's Meyersdale Bypass Project
Basics of Concrete Barriers
Linking Habitats and Reducing Roadkill
Hydraulics Testing of Wilson Bridge Designs
Beware of Invasive Species
Why Asset Management is More Critically Important Than Ever Before
Roadways and the Land: The Landscape Architect's Role
Developing an "Operations Vision"
Safety Leadership Today for a Safer Tomorrow
TRANSIMS Is Coming!
A Safe Place to Rest
Wireless Communications: A Modern Necessity
National Work Zone Safety Awareness Week -- April 3-7

TFHRC Home | FHWA Home | Feedback

United States Department of Transportation - Federal Highway

Administration