This invention relates to frangible post for guardrails.
Existing highway guardrail end treatment systems include: the breakaway cable terminal (BCT), the eccentric loader terminal (ELT), the modified eccentric loader terminal (MELT), the vehicle attenuating terminal (VAT), the extruder terminal (ET 2000 and ET plus), the slotted rail terminal (SRT), the sequential kinking terminal (SKT) and the flared energy absorbing terminal (FLEAT).
Terminal ends (that is, the end facing oncoming traffic) generally consist of one or more, often three, W shaped (in cross-section) guardrails supported by a series of both controlled release terminal (CRT) or frangible posts and standard highway guardrail posts. Generally a cable assembly arrangement is utilised that anchors the end of the rail to the ground, transferring tensile load developed in a side-on impact by an errant vehicle to the ground anchor. Generally the terminal ends have an impact head arrangement that will be the first part impacted by an errant vehicle during an end-on impact which is designed to spread or absorb some of the impact energy.
Some terminal ends such as the abovementioned ET, SKT and FLEAT, absorb the energy of the impacting vehicle during an end on impact by having an impact head that slides down the W shaped guardrails, extruding it and breaking away the support posts as it travels down the rails. All of the other abovementioned terminal ends work on the principal of various weakening devices in the posts and rails to allow an errant vehicle to penetrate the terminal end in a controlled manner and prevent the rails from spearing the vehicle or the vehicle from vaulting or jumping over a relatively stiff terminal end.
All of the abovementioned guardrail terminal ends are considered to be gating, that is, if impacted between the impact head and the “length of need” (where the “length of need” is considered to be the distance from the terminal end to where the guardrail will redirect a vehicle during an angled impact) during an angled impact, the terminal end will gate and allow the errant vehicle to pass to the back side of the terminal end. However this gating effect may have undesirable or unsafe results, and preferably an improved or safer or varied energy absorbing system is utilised to control errant vehicle barrier/guardrail impacts.
It is therefore an object of the present invention to provide a guardrail and/or guardrail impact head which will go at least some way towards addressing the foregoing problems or which will at least provide the industry with a useful choice.
All references, including any patents or patent applications cited in this specification are hereby incorporated by reference. No admission is made that any reference constitutes prior art. The discussion of the references states what their authors assert, and the applicants reserve the right to challenge the accuracy and pertinency of the cited documents. It will be clearly understood that, although a number of prior art publications are referred to herein, this reference does not constitute an admission that any of these documents form part of the common general knowledge in the art, in New Zealand or in any other country.
It is acknowledged that the term ‘comprise’ may, under varying jurisdictions, be attributed with either an exclusive or an inclusive meaning. For the purpose of this specification, and unless otherwise noted, the term ‘comprise’ shall have an inclusive meaning—i.e. that it will be taken to mean an inclusion of not only the listed components it directly references, but also other non-specified components or elements. This rationale will also be used when the term ‘comprised’ or ‘comprising’ is used in relation to one or more steps in a method or process.
Further aspects and advantages of the present invention will become apparent from the ensuing description which is given by way of example only.
In a first aspect, the invention may broadly be said to consist in a frangible post for a guardrail, wherein the post is of single piece construction and comprises:
Preferably the first and second members are integral or welded together.
Preferably, the first and second members are connected in one of the following configurations: an L-beam, an I-beam, an X-beam or a T-beam.
Preferably, two first members are connected to said second member in an I-beam configuration.
Preferably, the post is sunk into the ground, with the at least one region of weakness being near or at ground level.
Preferably, rotation of the bar member from said first orientation to said second orientation ensures that the cable follows a tortuous pathway.
Further aspects of the present invention will become apparent from the following description which is given by way of example only and with reference to the accompanying drawings in which:
This invention is designed to be a substantially non-gating guardrail, meaning that at any point along the side of the guardrail from the terminal end onwards, an impacting vehicle on an angled collision may be substantially redirected away from its initial impact trajectory. It is also designed to substantially absorb energy during an end on impact to the terminal end.
“Gating” is a term used within the guardrail industry to refer to sections of guardrail which are unable to withstand high impact side angle collisions, and significant guardrail deformation or ultimate failure or breakage may occur.
In relation to
In particular, a frangible post construction as illustrated in
In other words, because the first member is weakened in relation to an impact in a first direction and the second member has effectively no structural resistance to a force in that direction, the post will tend to bend or break at the weakened region when subjected to that force. In contrast, when impacted by a force substantially perpendicular to the first direction, the region of weakness in the first member has little effect on the frangibility of the post and the second member offers substantial resistance to deflection in that direction.
The first and second members need not be attached to one another at exactly 90°, however this orientation may be most suitable for use with a guardrail where impacts are generally received either in-line with the longitudinal axis of the guardrail, or substantially perpendicular to the guardrail.
The frangible post is designed to more easily structurally fail in an impact from a direction substantially in line with the longitudinal axis of the guardrail than in an impact substantially perpendicular to the guardrail.
The at least one region of weakness can be formed by a cut-away section 30 from the first members, or other similar notches or portions of the first member being removed. The configuration chosen may depend on the post geometry required by a user. The first and second members are preferably integrally formed or welded together.
Ideally, each post is sunk into the ground, with the at least one region of weakness being at or near to ground level; which allows the post to break off at or near ground level during a post failure impact.
For example, an I-beam configuration of the post as illustrated in
During an impact in an axial direction to the guardrail, a tear in the first member starts in the upstream note from the impact, while the downstream notch allows the first member to collapse and/or fail.
Preferably, the guardrail as described above may be utilised in applications where protective barriers are required to separate vehicle traffic flow from each other, or safety to pedestrians from vehicles, or even to protect vehicles running off roads. It is desirable that the guardrail as described provides a non-gating design and which re-directs an errant vehicle from its correct path back onto a road or at least away from pedestrians on a footpath.
The guardrail as described goes at least some way toward facilitating a system for controllably slowing a vehicle during an end-on barrier impact, as well as some way towards preventing the guardrail from gating during a side angled impact. It is also preferable that the “length of need” is substantially reduced compared to various existing technologies, and may most preferably have a length of need of almost zero distance.
The guardrail as described may be utilised to form a part of whole of a guardrail system, although this system in particular may be applied to the terminal ends of a required guardrail or barrier or be substantially retrofitable to existing guardrails.
Aspects of the present invention have been described by way of example only and it should be appreciated that modifications and additions may be made thereto without departing from the scope of the appended claims.
Number | Date | Country | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
528396 | Sep 2003 | NZ | national |
534826 | Aug 2004 | NZ | national |
This application claims the benefit of 35 U.S.C. §120 as a Divisional Application of U.S. Ser. No. 10/572,722, filed Nov. 6, 2006 now U.S. Pat. No. 7,699,293.
Number | Name | Date | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
1722994 | Burd | Aug 1929 | A |
3350039 | Crater | Oct 1967 | A |
3617076 | Attwood et al. | Nov 1971 | A |
3738599 | Borehag | Jun 1973 | A |
3776520 | Charles et al. | Dec 1973 | A |
3912404 | Katt | Oct 1975 | A |
3982734 | Walker | Sep 1976 | A |
4047702 | Cernia et al. | Sep 1977 | A |
4222552 | Matteo | Sep 1980 | A |
4330106 | Chisholm | May 1982 | A |
4452431 | Stephens et al. | Jun 1984 | A |
4655434 | Bronstad | Apr 1987 | A |
4674911 | Gertz | Jun 1987 | A |
4678166 | Bronstad et al. | Jul 1987 | A |
4730810 | Rambaud | Mar 1988 | A |
4739971 | Ruane | Apr 1988 | A |
5022782 | Gertz et al. | Jun 1991 | A |
5039066 | Stacey | Aug 1991 | A |
5118056 | Jeanise | Jun 1992 | A |
5207302 | Popp et al. | May 1993 | A |
5435524 | Ingram | Jul 1995 | A |
5851005 | Muller et al. | Dec 1998 | A |
5967497 | Denman et al. | Oct 1999 | A |
6065738 | Pearce et al. | May 2000 | A |
6065894 | Wasson et al. | May 2000 | A |
6149134 | Bank et al. | Nov 2000 | A |
6173943 | Welch et al. | Jan 2001 | B1 |
6290427 | Ochoa | Sep 2001 | B1 |
6398192 | Albritton | Jun 2002 | B1 |
6409417 | Muller et al. | Jun 2002 | B1 |
6488268 | Albritton | Dec 2002 | B1 |
6558067 | Ochoa | May 2003 | B2 |
6719483 | Welandsson | Apr 2004 | B1 |
6926462 | Fuganti et al. | Aug 2005 | B1 |
7086805 | Smith et al. | Aug 2006 | B2 |
7396184 | LaTurner et al. | Jul 2008 | B2 |
7445402 | Chen | Nov 2008 | B1 |
7699293 | James | Apr 2010 | B2 |
7785031 | Vellozzi et al. | Aug 2010 | B2 |
20020179894 | Albritton | Dec 2002 | A1 |
20030222254 | Bergendahl | Dec 2003 | A1 |
20040140460 | Heimbecker et al. | Jul 2004 | A1 |
20050077507 | Heimbecker et al. | Apr 2005 | A1 |
20050077508 | Bronstad | Apr 2005 | A1 |
20060017048 | Alberson et al. | Jan 2006 | A1 |
20060054876 | LaTurner et al. | Mar 2006 | A1 |
20060102883 | Troutman et al. | May 2006 | A1 |
20070252124 | Heimbecker | Nov 2007 | A1 |
Number | Date | Country |
---|---|---|
WO 9629473 | Sep 1996 | WO |
WO 9844203 | Oct 1998 | WO |
WO 9932728 | Jul 1999 | WO |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
20080283808 A1 | Nov 2008 | US |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
Parent | 10572722 | Nov 2006 | US |
Child | 12132958 | US |