The present invention relates generally to a guardrail system having a releasable post.
Guardrails have been used for many years on our nation's highways to protected errant motorists from hazards alongside the roadway. Guardrails function by capturing errant vehicles and redirecting them away from the hazard. Hazards that are commonly protected by guardrails include trees, signs, culverts, bridge piers, steep edge drop-offs, and soft soil that could cause a vehicle to roll.
Guardrails are able to capture and redirect an errant vehicle because they have the longitudinal strength to resist the vehicle impact. This means that the steel rail and its joints are stronger than the forces generated during the vehicle impact. The steel rail is held in place by either wood or steel posts. The posts hold the rail at the proper height and are designed to bend over and fail during an impact. These posts are individually relatively weak, however when taken as a system, they are able to resist the lateral loads imposed upon the rail. Additional structural strength is provided to the rail by anchoring each end of the rail, either through the use of a crashworthy end terminal, or some other means of fixing the end of the steel rail to the ground.
Traditional guardrail systems, such as disclosed by U.S. Pat. No. 3,493,213 to Ackerman, consist of a rail which is attached to a supporting post via an offset bracket or “block-out”. The offset brackets hold the guard rail panel away from its supporting posts so as to help prevent snagging of an impacting vehicle's wheels on the posts. Various types of offset brackets are commercially available, including wood blocks (hence the term “block-out”), steel I-beam sections, and also blocks formed of elastomeric materials, such as is disclosed by U.S. Pat. No. 6,530,560 to King.
Block-outs also may help maintain the height of the guardrail during a vehicle impact. For example, when a vehicle impacts a guardrail system with blockouts, the vehicle imparts lateral forces onto the rail. These forces are transmitted to the block-outs, which then transmit them to the support posts. The support posts may tend to rotate during the impact. Since the guardrail and blockouts are attached to the posts they also rotate on an arc generally centered at the point where the post is embedded in the soil. If the guardrail were directly connected to the post, this rotation would result in the guardrail being pulled downward, closer to the ground. But since the guardrail is spaced from the post, the rotation initially results in a slight gain in height of the guardrail, rather than a loss of height. Maintaining the guardrail at a consistent height may help prevent an impacting vehicle from riding up over the guardrail.
U.S. Pat. No. 7,530,548 to Ochoa discloses a guardrail system where the guardrail is directly connected to the post via a releasable fastener. The Ochoa system prevents issues with wheel snag and the guardrail being pulled down by an impact by using a weak fastener to hold the rail to the post. Because of this, the rail is released from the post very soon after a vehicle impact. This prevents the rail and the post working together to snag the wheels of an impacting vehicle. The released rail also cannot be pulled downwards by the post as it rotates during the impact.
U.S. Pat. No. 7,878,485 to Conway discloses a guardrail system that uses a standard guardrail bolt, with a washer between the post and the guardrail. A slot allows the rail to remain at generally the same height, without disengaging from the post, as the post rotates and moves laterally during a vehicle impact. Because the post continues to hold the guardrail during much of the impact event, the post continues to restrain the rail and resists additional lateral movement.
In a similar manner, U.S. Patent Application 20120003039 to Wallace discloses a guardrail system that consists of a carriage that attaches the guardrail to the support post. When the system is impacted, the carriage is free to move upwards, but is prevented from moving downwards by an indentation in the post. Although both the Wallace and Conway systems retain the guardrail, while preventing the rotation of the post from pulling it downwards, the systems do not capture and retain the guardrail at an appropriate pre-impact height, nor do they have a means of limiting the movement of the rail up the post. For instance, guardrail systems are subject to a variety of nuisance impacts which may flex the guardrail system, without permanently deforming it or causing significant damage such as low speed impacts by vehicles, bicycles, pedestrians, or wildlife. The guardrail may also be subject to various environmental forces, such as high winds, temperature fluctuations, and high snowfall. The effects of temperature fluctuations and snowfall may combine to create particularly harsh conditions for the guardrail. Temperature fluctuations may cause the fasteners in a guardrail system to loosen over time and this is particularly troublesome for guardrail system such as the Wallace and Conway designs that depend upon the tightness of fasteners to properly locate the rail. Once the fasteners in these designs are loosened, the rail is subject to misalignment from the nuisance impacts listed previously, any also from the effects of snowfall, and the forces transmitted to the rail by passing snowplows during its removal.
Briefly stated, in one aspect, one embodiment of a guardrail system includes a guardrail, a support post, and a fastener joining the guardrail and the support post. The support post includes a hole receiving the fastener, a fastener retention mechanism, and a slot for the movement of the fastener during an impact. The fastener retention mechanism retains the fastener in the hole until a predetermined level of force is attained during an impact, after which the fastener is released and moves into the slot.
In another aspect, one embodiment of a guardrail system includes a guardrail, a support post, and a fastener joining the guardrail and the support post, wherein the support post includes a hole for the fastener, a first slot for the movement of the fastener during an impact and a second slot between the hole and the first slot. In one embodiment, the width of the second slot is smaller than the width of the first slot and the diameter of the fastener.
In another aspect, a method of moving a guardrail relative to a support post includes impacting a guardrail joined to a support post with a fastener, wherein the support post includes a hole receiving the fastener, a fastener retention mechanism, and a slot, and wherein the fastener retention mechanism retains the fastener in the hole prior to the impacting of the guardrail, applying a predetermined force to the fastener retention mechanism with the fastener, moving the fastener into the slot after the predetermined force is attained, and moving the guardrail relative to the support post.
The foregoing paragraphs have been provided by way of general introduction, and are not intended to limit the scope of the following claims. The presently preferred embodiments, together with further advantages, will be best understood by reference to the following detailed description taken in conjunction with the accompanying drawings.
It should be understood that the term “longitudinal,” as used herein, means of or relating to length or the lengthwise direction of a guardrail, which is parallel to and defines an “axial impact direction.” The term “lateral,” as used herein, means directed toward or running perpendicular to the side of the guardrail. The term “coupled” means connected to or engaged with, whether directly or indirectly, for example with an intervening member, and does not require the engagement to be fixed or permanent, although it may be fixed or permanent, and includes both mechanical and electrical connection. It should be understood that the use of numerical terms “first,” “second” and “third” as used herein does not refer to any particular sequence or order of components; for example “first” and “second” rail sections may refer to any sequence of such sections, and is not limited to the first and second upstream rail sections unless otherwise specified. The term “frangible,” as used herein means to break into two or more pieces. The term “yield” means to bend or deform, without breaking. The term “downstream,” as used herein refers to the direction with the flow of traffic that is adjacent an end terminal or guardrail, whereas the term “upstream” means in a direction against or opposite the flow of traffic.
Referring to
Referring to
Above hole 22 is a fastener retention mechanism. In one embodiment, the fastener retention mechanism includes a second slot or necked opening 21, which has length 32 and width 31. The slot or necked opening 21 captures fastener 2 and prevents the upward movement thereof in pre-impact conditions. In one embodiment, the width 31 is smaller than the outer diameter of fastener 2. This prevents fastener 2 from moving through fastener slot 21 except during an impact event. Slot 21 is also defined by length 32. Slot 21 is designed to release the fastener 2 during an impact event, by way of the sides of the slot deforming, for example by shearing or bending. The amount of force required for the slot 21 to release is dependent upon the width 31 and the length 32, as well as the thickness of the post material. It should be understood that slot 21 could take many forms including a constriction 423 on one or both sides of slot 21 as shown in
Referring again to
This will provide a retarding force, depending upon the amount of difference between width 34 of the slot 20 and the width or diameter of fastener 2. This retarding force may be used to limit how quickly fastener 2 travels upwards in slot 20. In still other applications, the force for fastener 2 to travel in slot 20 needs to be as low as possible. In these applications, the threads on faster 2 may limit the travel of nut 3 (i.e. the threads to not extend all of the way to the head) on the fastener 2 as shown in
In
The various embodiments disclosed herein provide for a support post that retains the guardrail while minimizing lateral deflection of the guardrail. At the same time, the support posts allow the guardrail to remain at or near its pre-impact height, while the support post rotates about its anchorage due to the imposed impact loads. The support post also maintains the height of the guardrail in a pre-impact condition at an appropriate level.
Although the present invention has been described with reference to preferred embodiments, those skilled in the art will recognize that changes may be made in form and detail without departing from the spirit and scope of the invention. As such, it is intended that the foregoing detailed description be regarded as illustrative rather than limiting and that it is the appended claims, including all equivalents thereof, which are intended to define the scope of the invention.
This application claims benefit of U.S. Provisional Application No. 61/774,324, filed Mar. 7, 2013, and U.S. Provisional Application No. 61/730,259, filed Nov. 27, 2012, the entire disclosures of which are hereby incorporated herein by reference.
Number | Name | Date | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
2520313 | Harris | Aug 1950 | A |
2776116 | Brickman | Jan 1957 | A |
3207478 | St. Pierre | Sep 1965 | A |
3390865 | Jehu | Jul 1968 | A |
3493213 | Ackerman | Feb 1970 | A |
4126403 | Sweeney et al. | Nov 1978 | A |
4223872 | Boal | Sep 1980 | A |
4460161 | Grenga | Jul 1984 | A |
4611480 | Willetts | Sep 1986 | A |
4838523 | Humble et al. | Jun 1989 | A |
4869969 | Pavlov et al. | Sep 1989 | A |
5044609 | Cicinnati et al. | Sep 1991 | A |
5069576 | Pomero | Dec 1991 | A |
5085409 | Teixeira | Feb 1992 | A |
5125194 | Granger | Jun 1992 | A |
5169127 | Eynard | Dec 1992 | A |
5172891 | Chen | Dec 1992 | A |
5195727 | Liao et al. | Mar 1993 | A |
5203543 | Fleury | Apr 1993 | A |
5657966 | Cicinnati | Aug 1997 | A |
5851005 | Muller et al. | Dec 1998 | A |
5957435 | Bronstad | Sep 1999 | A |
6007269 | Marinelli | Dec 1999 | A |
6036399 | Schalk | Mar 2000 | A |
6367869 | Baccouche et al. | Apr 2002 | B1 |
6409417 | Muller et al. | Jun 2002 | B1 |
6454244 | Coulson | Sep 2002 | B1 |
6530560 | King | Mar 2003 | B2 |
6886813 | Albritton | May 2005 | B2 |
6962328 | Bergendahl | Nov 2005 | B2 |
7101111 | Albritton | Sep 2006 | B2 |
7530548 | Ochoa | May 2009 | B2 |
7726632 | Amengual Pericas | Jun 2010 | B2 |
7794173 | Amengual Pericas | Sep 2010 | B2 |
7878485 | Conway et al. | Feb 2011 | B2 |
7878486 | Ochoa | Feb 2011 | B2 |
8500103 | Alberson et al. | Aug 2013 | B2 |
20070063179 | Alberson et al. | Mar 2007 | A1 |
20070131918 | James | Jun 2007 | A1 |
20090050863 | Conway et al. | Feb 2009 | A1 |
20100293870 | Amengual Pericas | Nov 2010 | A1 |
20110084246 | Amengual Pericas | Apr 2011 | A1 |
20120003039 | Wallace et al. | Jan 2012 | A1 |
20120119175 | Conway et al. | May 2012 | A1 |
Number | Date | Country |
---|---|---|
2005211646 | Apr 2007 | AU |
2005101085 | Apr 2012 | AU |
2 019 040 | Nov 1971 | DE |
86 10 402 | Jun 1986 | DE |
35 33 963 | Jun 1989 | DE |
0 708 206 | Apr 1996 | EP |
1 624 111 | Feb 2006 | EP |
2128342 | Dec 2009 | EP |
2 816 344 | May 2002 | FR |
2005-120577 | May 2005 | JP |
980008281 | Apr 1998 | KR |
2006-0026337 | Mar 2006 | KR |
101132807 | Apr 2012 | KR |
WO 0218730 | Mar 2002 | WO |
WO 2006027394 | Mar 2006 | WO |
WO 2007129914 | Nov 2007 | WO |
WO 2009025997 | Feb 2009 | WO |
Entry |
---|
International Search Report and Written Opinion of the International Searching Authority for International Application No. PCT/US2013/065408, dated Mar. 4, 2014, 8 pages. |
Engstrand, Klas Erik, “Improvements to the Weak-Post W-Beam Guardrail,” M.S. Thesis, Worcester Polytechnic Institute, 2000, 141 pages. |
Michie, J.D. et al., “Guardrail Crash Test Evaluation—New Concepts and Designs,” National Cooperative Highway Research Program Report 129, Highway Research Board, 1972, 52 pages. |
Ray, Malcolm H. et al., “Improvements to the Weak-Post W-Beam Guardrail,” Transportation Research Record 1743, Paper No. 01-2282, 2001, pp. 88-96. |
Sicking, Dean L. et al., “Development of the Midwest Guardrail System,” Transportation Research Record 1797, Paper No. 02-3157, 2002, pp. 44-52. |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
20140145132 A1 | May 2014 | US |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
61730259 | Nov 2012 | US | |
61774324 | Mar 2013 | US |