1. Field of the Invention
The present invention generally relates to improvements for guardrail terminal installations and, in particular aspects, the invention relates to improved support posts and support systems for guardrail terminal systems that have safety end treatments.
2. Description of the Related Art
An important aspect of guardrail design is the ability of the guardrail to resist rupture and prevent penetration of the rail by a vehicle that impacts the guardrail end. For that reason, conventional guardrail installations are provided along their lengths with “strong” support posts that provide very little give when impacted by a vehicle. “Strong” support posts include 7″ diameter wood posts, W6×9 steel section posts and 6″ by 8″ wood posts.
Recently, it has also become important that a guardrail installation not present a hazard to a vehicle during an “end-on” impact where the guardrail installation is impacted from its end by a vehicle. As a result, a number of solutions have been proposed and used for eliminating the upraised end of the guardrail for making it safer.
The guardrail extruder terminal (GET) and slotted rail terminal (SRT) are known safety end treatments for a guardrail assembly that permit the guardrail assembly to safely absorb some or all of the vehicle's kinetic energy during an end-on collision, thereby eliminating the hazard associated with the upraised end. These end treatments are desirable because they absorb the energy of an end-on collision in a controlled manner to help bring an impacting vehicle to a safe stop or they allow the vehicle to safely “gate” through the terminal after absorbing some of the vehicle's energy. The GET is described in U.S. Pat. Nos. 5,078,366 and 4,928,928. The SRT is described in U.S. Pat. Nos. 5,547,309 and 5,407,298. Those patents are incorporated herein by reference. These end treatments were originally designed so that the support posts of the terminal would be readily frangible, “breakaway” posts made of wood. Holes were usually drilled through the post near the ground line in order to weaken the post at that point. Guardrail support posts downstream from the terminal are typically solid wooden posts used to securely anchor the midportion of the guardrail assembly to the ground. As the guardrail collapsed or became flattened by the end treatment, the breakaway posts would be broken at or around the ground line.
There are, however, drawbacks to using strong posts along the length of the end-treatment terminal. The strong posts must be weakened in some manner to accommodate end on impacts to the terminal. These modifications are costly and time consuming and, if done improperly or forgotten, can result in a significant safety hazard for motorists.
The inventors believe that, to date, guardrail terminals have used entirely strong support posts that have been modified by drilling holes or using other means to cause the post to breakaway. An improved guardrail installation would be desirable.
The present invention provides new and innovative devices and methods for supporting guardrail in guardrail terminals that incorporate safety end treatments such as the GET and the SRT. Preferred embodiments are described wherein the guardrail in a terminal is primarily supported above the ground using weak support posts that are preferably made of metal. The ends of the terminal installation are secured to the ground using breakaway posts and other accessories.
In operation, the weak posts in the downstream portion of the guardrail installation help to contain and redirect a vehicle during a lateral collision to the rail member. The anchorage in part provided by the breakaway end posts helps prevent excessive guardrail displacements that will allow the impacting vehicle to pass over to the opposite side of the guardrail during side or lateral impacts along the length of the terminal.
In other aspects, the invention provides an alternative to use of post weakening mechanisms which results in savings of costs. In operation, terminal assemblies constructed in accordance with the present invention provide an improved support system for the rail member which is more forgiving than conventional strong post support systems, thereby providing an improvement in safety.
At the present time, the invention has particular application in some non-U.S. countries, where it is required or highly preferred that metal support posts be used either completely or primarily within guardrail installations. However, the invention is also applicable to installation within the United States.
Referring initially to
Each of the guardrail terminals 13 include a substantially continuous, corrugated rail 18 that is supported at its end 14 or 16 by a pair of support posts 20. The rail 18 is supported in each terminal 13 by support posts 22.
Each terminal 13 of the rail installation 10 includes a safety device, generally depicted at 28 in
Preferably, up to three types of support posts, 20, 22, and 19 may be used to support the rails 17 and 18. Moving downstream from the impact head 30 along the terminal 13, the first two support posts 20 (only one shown in
A tension cable assembly 48 (shown in
The support posts 20, which are the one or two most extreme posts at either end 14 or 16 of the installation are, as noted, frangible or breakaway in nature. During an end-on impact, then, the supports posts 20 will easily breakaway near the ground line of the post 20 to release the cable 48 and the rail 18 from their anchorage. With when the lead post broken away, the cable assembly 48 will also be released from its attachment to the post 20. There are a number of post structures that are suitable for use as breakaway posts 20. In certain, non-U.S. countries, for example, it is desirable and sometimes required to use non-wooden posts for guardrail installations. Thus, a breakaway steel post assembly would be particularly desirable. One example of a suitable steel breakaway post is described in U.S. Pat. No. 5,988,598. Another suitable steel breakaway post is the HBA post, which is Marketed commercially by Trinity Industries of Dallas, Tex. In other instances, a wooden breakaway post may be used, although this is not preferred, particularly in many non-U.S. countries where the use of wooden support posts must be minimized or eliminated. The structure and operation of wooden breakaway posts is known and described in U.S. Pat. No. 5,547,309.
Posts 22 located along the length of each terminal 13 downstream from posts 20 along assembly 10, are unmodified yielding, or “weak,” support posts. The term “unmodified,” as used herein, refers to a post that has not been subjected to any weakening mechanisms, whether by mechanical, chemical or other means, such as by drilling holes in the post, by notching the post, by incorporating mechanical breakaway devices such as frangible connections, or by incorporating bolts that shear upon impact. The unmodified weak post, by its inherent cross-sectional properties and material properties, readily yields or is deflected in a collision. It is preferred that the weak posts 22 be formed of metal rather than of wood. An unmodified “weak” support post is a support post that readily yields or is deflected in a collision. Further, an unmodified weak support post is one that will meet “preferred” occupant impact velocity and occupant ridedown acceleration limits, as recommended in NCHRP Report 350 or its successor, when impacted in a direction consistent with the direction it would be impacted in end-on tests of a guardrail terminal by design vehicles recommended in NCHRP Report 350 or its successor, traveling at speeds of approximately 15 mph or greater with the post embedded in soils as recommended in NCHRP Report 350 or its successor. Weak support posts are further characterized by a greater amount of deflection upon impact than strong posts.
In addition, an unmodified weak guardrail post is one that will meet Impact Severity Class A, as specified in CEN prEN 1317-4, Trento, June 1999, or its successor, when impacted in end-on tests of a guardrail terminal by test vehicles specified in CEN prEN 1317-4, Trento, June 1999, or its successor, traveling at speeds or approximately 25 km/h or greater, with the posts embedded in soils as recommended in CEN prEN 1317-4, Trento, June 1999, or its successor.
Examples of commercially available unmodified weak posts are 4″ diameter circular wood posts, 4″×6″ rectangular wood posts and S3×5.7 steel section posts. It is preferred, particularly for application in many non-U.S. countries, that the weak posts comprise either C-120 or S3×5.7 steel section posts since these posts are not made of wood. Presently, it is highly preferred that the weak posts 22 comprise a C-120-type post, which is a standard Spanish support post. A U-shaped post is illustrated in
Posts 19 located along the central portion of the guardrail installation may be the same as posts 22 or 22′, or they may be different in size, shape or material.
Referring now to
The guardrail installation 100 should, in response to a lateral impact upon the rail 18, react in the same manner as the installation 10 described earlier. The weak posts 22 will yield or be deflected thereby softening the impact for the impacting vehicle. In an end-on impact, the SRT end treatment 102 will result in axial collapse of the rail 18. The rail 18 will be released from the weak support posts 22 as the connectors 56 are pulled out of the rail 18.
A principal advantage is that guardrail installations constructed in accordance with the present invention are more forgiving during an impact to the lateral side thereby resulting in less damage to impacting vehicles and their passengers. Strong wooden support posts used in conventional systems do not easily yield in a collision and thus cause significant damage to the impacting vehicle. At the same time, the weak posts 20 used in the invention are capable of arresting an impacting vehicle that would impact the lateral side of the rail 18. This capability is provided, in part, by the brackets 50 and the anchorage afforded the system by the tension cable assembly 48. A further considerable advantage provided by the present invention is the savings in cost over installations that utilize more expensive strong wooden posts.
While the invention has been shown or described in only some of its forms, it should be apparent to those skilled in the art that it is not so limited, but is susceptible to other various changes without departing from the scope of the invention.
Number | Name | Date | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
79141 | McFarlin | Jun 1868 | A |
398078 | Peterson | Feb 1889 | A |
446852 | Davis | Feb 1891 | A |
629185 | Arnold | Jul 1899 | A |
1329492 | Babcock | Feb 1920 | A |
1335302 | Stout | Mar 1920 | A |
1473118 | Miller-Masury | Nov 1923 | A |
1677796 | Parks | Jul 1928 | A |
2089929 | Brickman et al. | Aug 1937 | A |
2091195 | Dennebaum | Aug 1937 | A |
2123167 | Cain | Jul 1938 | A |
2135705 | Florance | Nov 1938 | A |
2146333 | Deming | Feb 1939 | A |
2146445 | Russert et al. | Feb 1939 | A |
RE22060 | Hayden et al. | Apr 1942 | E |
2309238 | Corey | Jan 1943 | A |
2321988 | Brickman | Jun 1943 | A |
2735251 | Dlugosch | Feb 1956 | A |
2776116 | Brickman | Jan 1957 | A |
3185445 | Broadway | May 1965 | A |
3308584 | Graham | Mar 1967 | A |
3332666 | Gray | Jul 1967 | A |
3349531 | Watson | Oct 1967 | A |
3385564 | Persicke | May 1968 | A |
3417965 | Gray | Dec 1968 | A |
3450233 | Massa | Jun 1969 | A |
3499630 | Dashio | Mar 1970 | A |
3519301 | Somnitz | Jul 1970 | A |
3521917 | King | Jul 1970 | A |
3567184 | Yancey | Mar 1971 | A |
3606222 | Howard | Sep 1971 | A |
3617076 | Attwood | Nov 1971 | A |
3632088 | Filipek et al. | Jan 1972 | A |
3637244 | Strizki | Jan 1972 | A |
3643924 | Fitch | Feb 1972 | A |
3680448 | Ballingall et al. | Aug 1972 | A |
3693940 | Kendall et al. | Sep 1972 | A |
3711881 | Chapman et al. | Jan 1973 | A |
3768781 | Walker et al. | Oct 1973 | A |
3776520 | Charles et al. | Dec 1973 | A |
3820906 | Katt | Jun 1974 | A |
3846030 | Katt | Nov 1974 | A |
3856268 | Fitch | Dec 1974 | A |
3912404 | Katt | Oct 1975 | A |
3919380 | Smarook et al. | Nov 1975 | A |
3925929 | Montgomery | Dec 1975 | A |
3951556 | Strizki | Apr 1976 | A |
3967906 | Strizki | Jul 1976 | A |
3972510 | Dougherty | Aug 1976 | A |
3981486 | Baumann | Sep 1976 | A |
3982734 | Walker | Sep 1976 | A |
4000882 | Penton | Jan 1977 | A |
4063713 | Anolick et al. | Dec 1977 | A |
4071970 | Strizki | Feb 1978 | A |
4126403 | Sweeney et al. | Nov 1978 | A |
4183695 | Wilcox | Jan 1980 | A |
4190275 | Mileti | Feb 1980 | A |
4200310 | Carney, III | Apr 1980 | A |
4236843 | Chisholm | Dec 1980 | A |
4269384 | Saeed et al. | May 1981 | A |
4278228 | Rebentisch et al. | Jul 1981 | A |
4295637 | Huleck | Oct 1981 | A |
4330106 | Chisholm | May 1982 | A |
4351617 | Landa | Sep 1982 | A |
4352484 | Gertz et al. | Oct 1982 | A |
4389134 | Colas | Jun 1983 | A |
4399980 | van Schie | Aug 1983 | A |
4432172 | Kuykendall et al. | Feb 1984 | A |
4452431 | Stephens et al. | Jun 1984 | A |
4490062 | Chisholm | Dec 1984 | A |
4501411 | Otaki | Feb 1985 | A |
4583716 | Stephens et al. | Apr 1986 | A |
4607824 | Krage et al. | Aug 1986 | A |
4645375 | Carney, III | Feb 1987 | A |
4646489 | Feller et al. | Mar 1987 | A |
4655434 | Bronstad | Apr 1987 | A |
4674911 | Gertz | Jun 1987 | A |
4678166 | Bronstad et al. | Jul 1987 | A |
4729690 | Lavender et al. | Mar 1988 | A |
4784515 | Krage et al. | Nov 1988 | A |
4815565 | Sicking et al. | Mar 1989 | A |
4819915 | Cargnel | Apr 1989 | A |
4838523 | Humble et al. | Jun 1989 | A |
4852847 | Pagel | Aug 1989 | A |
4923319 | Dent | May 1990 | A |
4926592 | Nehls | May 1990 | A |
4928446 | Alexander, Sr. | May 1990 | A |
4928928 | Buth et al. | May 1990 | A |
4986687 | Ivey | Jan 1991 | A |
5011326 | Carney, III | Apr 1991 | A |
5022782 | Gertz et al. | Jun 1991 | A |
5054954 | Cobb et al. | Oct 1991 | A |
5069576 | Pomero | Dec 1991 | A |
5078366 | Sicking et al. | Jan 1992 | A |
5112028 | Laturner | May 1992 | A |
5203543 | Fleury | Apr 1993 | A |
5214886 | Hughron | Jun 1993 | A |
5244101 | Palmer et al. | Sep 1993 | A |
5248129 | Gertz | Sep 1993 | A |
5286137 | Cicinnati et al. | Feb 1994 | A |
5391016 | Ivey et al. | Feb 1995 | A |
5403112 | Carney, III | Apr 1995 | A |
5407298 | Sicking et al. | Apr 1995 | A |
5481835 | Bloom | Jan 1996 | A |
5484217 | Carroll et al. | Jan 1996 | A |
5503495 | Mak et al. | Apr 1996 | A |
5547309 | Mak et al. | Aug 1996 | A |
5647520 | McDaid | Jul 1997 | A |
5657966 | Cicinnati | Aug 1997 | A |
5660375 | Freeman | Aug 1997 | A |
5660496 | Muller et al. | Aug 1997 | A |
5664905 | Thompson et al. | Sep 1997 | A |
5733062 | Oberth et al. | Mar 1998 | A |
5746419 | McFadden et al. | May 1998 | A |
5765811 | Alberson et al. | Jun 1998 | A |
5775675 | Sicking et al. | Jul 1998 | A |
5791812 | Ivey | Aug 1998 | A |
5797591 | Krage | Aug 1998 | A |
5797592 | Machado | Aug 1998 | A |
5823584 | Carney, III | Oct 1998 | A |
5832762 | McDaid | Nov 1998 | A |
5851005 | Muller et al. | Dec 1998 | A |
5855443 | Faller et al. | Jan 1999 | A |
5876020 | Giavotto | Mar 1999 | A |
5924680 | Sicking et al. | Jul 1999 | A |
5931448 | Sicking et al. | Aug 1999 | A |
5957435 | Bronstad | Sep 1999 | A |
5966867 | Downer et al. | Oct 1999 | A |
5988598 | Sicking et al. | Nov 1999 | A |
5992828 | Burdick | Nov 1999 | A |
6007269 | Marinelli | Dec 1999 | A |
6010275 | Fitch | Jan 2000 | A |
6022003 | Sicking et al. | Feb 2000 | A |
6065894 | Wasson et al. | May 2000 | A |
6092959 | Leonhardt et al. | Jul 2000 | A |
6109597 | Sicking et al. | Aug 2000 | A |
6116805 | Gertz | Sep 2000 | A |
6129342 | Bronstad | Oct 2000 | A |
6168346 | Ernsberger | Jan 2001 | B1 |
6203079 | Breed | Mar 2001 | B1 |
6210066 | Dent | Apr 2001 | B1 |
6220575 | Lindsay et al. | Apr 2001 | B1 |
6244571 | Reid et al. | Jun 2001 | B1 |
6254063 | Rohde et al. | Jul 2001 | B1 |
6260827 | Sicking et al. | Jul 2001 | B1 |
6272796 | Metzler | Aug 2001 | B1 |
6290427 | Ochoa | Sep 2001 | B1 |
6299141 | Lindsay et al. | Oct 2001 | B1 |
6308809 | Reid et al. | Oct 2001 | B1 |
6340268 | Alberson et al. | Jan 2002 | B1 |
6347904 | Knighton | Feb 2002 | B1 |
6398192 | Albritton | Jun 2002 | B1 |
6409156 | Dent | Jun 2002 | B2 |
6416041 | Sicking et al. | Jul 2002 | B1 |
6435761 | Bligh et al. | Aug 2002 | B1 |
6461076 | Stephens et al. | Oct 2002 | B1 |
6488268 | Albritton | Dec 2002 | B1 |
6554256 | Ochoa | Apr 2003 | B2 |
6609343 | Litten | Aug 2003 | B1 |
6637971 | Carney, III et al. | Oct 2003 | B1 |
6644888 | Ochoa | Nov 2003 | B2 |
20010013596 | Sicking et al. | Aug 2001 | A1 |
20010048101 | Bligh et al. | Dec 2001 | A1 |
20020007994 | Reid et al. | Jan 2002 | A1 |
20020179894 | Albritton | Dec 2002 | A1 |
20030015695 | Alberson et al. | Jan 2003 | A1 |
20030168650 | Alberson et al. | Sep 2003 | A1 |
20030213946 | Alberson et al. | Nov 2003 | A1 |
20030215305 | Alberson et al. | Nov 2003 | A1 |
20060017048 | Alberson et al. | Jan 2006 | A1 |
Number | Date | Country |
---|---|---|
278890 | Feb 1970 | AT |
603003 | Mar 1989 | AU |
A02184488 | Nov 1990 | AU |
472-00 | Mar 2000 | CL |
1 916 361 | Mar 1963 | DE |
1534526 | Nov 1965 | DE |
3708861 | Oct 1988 | DE |
0 245 042 | Nov 1987 | EP |
0952256 | Apr 1999 | EP |
0 924 347 | Jun 1999 | EP |
095226 | Oct 1999 | EP |
2 386 667 | Apr 1977 | FR |
2386667 | Mar 1978 | FR |
2546932 | Jun 1983 | FR |
2023695 | Jan 1980 | GB |
10 18255 | Jan 1989 | JP |
40465 | Oct 1961 | LU |
41444 | May 1962 | LU |
WO 9620311 | Apr 1996 | WO |
9850637 | Nov 1998 | WO |
0040805 | Jul 2000 | WO |
0218708 | Mar 2002 | WO |
Entry |
---|
Trinity Industries, Inc., Highway Safety Products (ET Family, ET-2000/LET ET-PLUS) Jun. 17, 2000, [online] [retrieved on Feb. 27, 2003] Retrieved from Internet <URL: http://www.highwayguardrail.com/Products%20-%20ET%20FAMILY.html>. |
Pride Enterprises, (Wood & Recreational Products) Oct. 3, 2000, [online] [retrieved on Feb. 27, 2003] Retrieved from Internet <URL: http://web.archive.org/web/20001003144854/http://www.peol.com/wood.htm>. |
U.S. Appl. No. 09/943,727 entitled: ET-PLUS: Head Assembly for Guardrail Extruder Terminal, Aug. 31, 2001. |
U.S. Appl. No. 10/308,296 entitled: Stell Yielding Guardrail Support Post, Dec. 2, 2002. |
ET-2000 the Future of Highway Safety—SYRO (Printed in Dec. 1990; revised Oct. 1992). |
Bronstad, et al., Modified Breakaway Cable Terminals for Guardrails and Median Barriers, Research Results Digest, NCHRP, Transportation Research Board, Digest 12, May 1978. |
Breakaway Metal Post for Highway Guardrail End Treatments U.S. Appl. No. 09/074,496, filed May 7, 1998 James R. Albritton, May 7, 1998. |
Breakaway Support Post for Highway Guardrail End Treatments U.S. Appl. No. 09/358,017, filed Jul. 19, 1999 James R. Albritton, Jul. 19, 1999. |
“INFORMATION: Report 350Acceptance of New York 3-Strand Cable Terminal”, Memorandum No. HMHS-CC63 from Dwight A. Horne, Director, Office Highway Safty Infrastructure, U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, to Resource Center Directors, Division Administrators and Federal Lands Highway Division Engineers, 2 pages Memorandum and 3 pages of Attachments, Feb. 14, 2000. |
“Road Restraint Systems—Part 4: Barrier Systems . . . ”, European Standard, Draft, PrEN 1317-4, Jun. 17-18, 1999, European Committee for Standardisation, Doc No: 226/WG1/TG1/041, Contral Secretariat: rue de Stassart 36, B 6 1050 Brussels. |
“Road Restraint Systems—Part 4: Performance Classes . . . ”, British Standard, Oct. 18, 2002, © BSI, ENV 1317-4:2001 (E). |
“Recommended Procedures for the Safety Performance Evaluation of Highway Features”, NCHRP Report 350, National Cooperative Highway Research Program, Transportation Research Board. |
“BEAT Box Beam Bursting Energy Absorbing Terminal”, RSI Road Systems, Inc., http://www.roadsystems.com/beat.htm. |