FULL-SCALE VEHICLE CRASH TESTS ON THE

IOWA BOX-ALUMINUM BRIDGE RAIL

.-a

+----

Mr. Ronald K. Faller, E.LT. Graduate Research Engineer

Mr. John A. Magdaleno, E.I.T. Dr. Edward R. Post, P.E. Graduate Research Engineer Professor of Civil Engineering

submitted to

Mr. William A. Lundquist, P.E. Bridge Engineer

Iowa Depart.ment of Transportation

in cooperation with the

FederallTighway Admlnj~trat.ion - Iowa Division

TRANSPORTATION RESEARCH REPORT TRP- 03- 013- 88

Civil Engineering Department W348 Nebraska Hall

University of Nebraska- Lincoln Lincoln, Nebraska

68588-0531

November) 1988

DISCLAIMER STATEMENT

The contents of this report reflect the views o f the authors who are responsible f or the facts and the accuracy of the data presented herein. The contents do not necessarily reflect the official views or policies of the Iowa Department o f Transportation or the Federal Highway Administrati on . Thi s report does not constitute a standard , specifi cation, or regulation.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Abstract

List of Tables

List of Figures

Acknowledgments

1. INTRODUCTION

1.1 Problem Statement

1.2 Objective of Study

2 . TEST CONDITIONS

2 . 1. Test Facility

2.1.1. Test Site

2.1.2. Vehicle Tow System

2.1.3. Vehicle Guidance System

2.2. Bridge Rail Design Details

2.3. Test Vehicles.

2.4. Data Acquisition Systems

2.4.1. Acceleromete rs .

2 . 4.2. High-Speed Photography

2.4.3. Speed Trap Swi tches

2.5. Test Parameters

3. PERFORMANCE EVALUATION CRITERIA

4 . TEST RESULTS

4.1. Test No. 11-1

4.2. Test No. 11-2

5. CONCLUSIONS

6. REFERENCES

i

Page

iii

iv

v

vi

1

1

1

2

2

2

2

2

6

10

14

14

14

18

20

21

24

24

29

36

41

7. APPENDICES 42

Appendix A Concret.e Compressive St.rengths and

Design Mix 43

Appendix B Occupant Risk Determination 46

Appendix C Accelerometer Data Analysis 48

Appendix 0 Relevant rOOT Correspondence 61

ii

ABSTRACT

Two full-scale vehicle crash tests were conducted on the

Iowa Box-Aluminum Bridge Rail. Test 11-1 was conducted with an

1800 lb. vehicle at 15 deg. and 60 mph. Test 11-2 was conducted

with a 4310 lb. vehicle at 25 deg. and 60 mph. The Iowa Box­

Aluminum Bridge Rail contained two rail splices. Each splice was

26 ft.-6 in. from the rail post on each end. The point of impact

for Test 11-1 was directly at a splice. The point of impact for

Test 11-2 was directly at the midpoint of the span that contained

the second splice. The tests were evaluated according to the

safety criteria in NCHRP 230. The safety performance of the Iowa

Box-Aluminum Bridge Rail was determined to be unsatisfactory.

iii

LIST OF TABLES

1. Crash Test Conditions and NCHRP 230 Safety

Evaluation Criteria .

2. Summary of Test Results.

3. Safety Evaluation Summary

iv

Page

22

37

38

LIST OF FIGURES

1. Full-Scale Vehic le Crash Test Facility

2. Sketch of Cable Tow a nd Guidance System

3. Photographs o f Tow Vehicle and Fifth-Wheel

4. Photographs of Vehi c le Guidance System

5. Sketch of the Iowa Box-Aluminum Bridge Rail

6. Typical Sections o f Bridge Rail

7. Photographs of Test Vehicles

8. Vehicle Dimensions for Honda Civic

9. Vehicle Dimensions for Cadillac Coupe Deville

10. Photographs of the Onboard Data Acquisition System

11 . Flowchart of Accelerometer Data Acquisition System

12 . Data Recorder and 386/AT Computer

13. High-Speed Camera Locations .

14. Test 11-1 Summary and Sequential Photos

15. Photographs of Vehicle Damage, Test 11-1

16. Photographs of Box-Aluminum Bridge Rail Damage,

Test 11-1

17. Test 11-2 Results and Sequential Photos

18. Photographs of Vehicle Damage , Test 11-2

19. Photographs of Box-Aluminum Bridge Rail Damage,

Test 11-2

20. Permanent Set Graphs , Test 11- 2

21. Sketch of Misplaced Curb Reinforcement Steel

for Task 1

v

Page 3

4

5

7

8

9

11

12

13

15

16

17

19

25

26

27

30

31

32

34

35

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

The authors wish to express their appreciation and thanks to

the following people who made a contribution to the outcome of

this research project.

lQRa Department 2L Transpo rtatjo n

This evaluation task was administered and directed by

William A. Lundquist, Bridge Engineer for the Iowa Department o f

Transportation, who was assisted by IDOT engineers Roger E.

Bierbaum, William C. Eyer, and Ron C. Welch.

Federal Higbway Administratio D

The Iowa Division Office of the Federal Highway

Administration was represented by Bruce L. Brakke, Division

Bridge Engineer, and John M. Latterell, Division Safety Engineer,

who cooperated and advised during the evaluation.

Nebraska Department ~ Ro ads

Dalyce Ronnau (Materials and Test Division and Research Engineer )

John Luedeke (Materials and Test Division)

Dan Kluck (Materials and Test Division)

Unive rsity Qf Nebraska Linco ln

Ron Hoffman (Elect r ician - Maintenance)

Michael Cacak (Manager - Automobile Support Services)

Patrick Barrett (Assistant Manager - Automobile Support Services)

James Dunlap (Manager - Photographic Productions)

Gerald Fritz (E.E. Technician)

Tom Grady (E.E. Technician)

William Kelly (Professor and C.E . Chairman)

v i

Eugene Mat son (C.E. Research Technician)

Brian Pfeifer (M.E. Student)

Todd Noble (C.E. Student)

Jim Holloway (C. E . Student)

Mary Lou Tomka (C.E. Administrative Assistant)

Marilyn Mues (C.E. Secretary - Typist )

Mary Lou Wegener (C.E. Secretary - Typist)

Private

Larry Storjohn (Auto Buyer)

Mike Collins (M.E. Collins Construction)

Steve Buchanan (M.E. Collins Construction)

vii

1_ INTRODUCTION

1.1. Problem Statement

The Iowa Department of Transportation and the Federal

Highway Administration are concerned with the safety and

st ructural adequacy of highway and bridge railing systems

installed on Iowa highways. The performance of certain Iowa

railing systems, now in service. cannot be predicted nor verified

by conventional analysis.

Current AASHTO Standard Specifications for Highway Bridges

permits the qualification of railing systems by full-scale

vehicle crash testing. The Federal Highway Administration has

directed that bridge railing systems be successfully crash tested

before their use on Federal Aid Projects is approved.

The Iowa Box-Aluminum Bridge Rail was constructed for

approximately 10 years between 1965 and 1975. The Box-Aluminum

Rail came as a result from changes in the 1964 Interim Bridge

Specifications to AASHTO and is an extruded, ductile aluminum

rail system mounted on top of a concrete curb.

The results of this study will be used to help guide the

IDOT in the identification and evaluation of current procedures

in which to improve the safety of the roadway environment.

1 .2. Objective af Study

The objective of the research study was to evaluate the

safety performances o f the Iowa Box-Aluminum Bridge Rail by

conducting full-scale vehicle crash tests in accordance with the

recommended procedures in NCHRP 230 ( 1 ).

1

2.1. ~ Facility

2.1 . 1. ~ ~

2. TEST CONDITIONS

The test site facility was located at Lincoln Air-Park on

the NW end of the west apron of the Lincoln Municipal Airport.

The test facility, shown in Figure 1 , is approximately 5 mi. NW

of the University o f Nebraska-Lincoln.

An 8 ft. high chain - linked sec urity fence surrounds the test

site facility to ensure that no vandalism would occur to the test

articles or test vehicles which could possibly disrupt the

results of the tests.

2.1.2. Vehicle T2R System

A reverse cable tow, with a 1:2 mechanical advantage, was

used to propel the test vehicle. The distance traveled and speed

of the tow vehicle are one-half of that of the test vehicle. A

sketch of the cable tow system is shown in Figure 2. The test

vehicle was released from the tow cable approximately 10 ft . for

Test 11-1 and 18 ft. for Test 11-2 before impact with the Box ­

Aluminum Bridge Rail. Photographs of the tow vehicle and the

attached fifth-wheel are shown in Figure 3. The fifth-wheel,

built by the Nucleus Corporation, was used for accurately towing

the test vehicle at the required target speed with the aid of a

digital speedometer in the tow vehicle.

2.1 . 3. Vehicle Guidance System

A vehicle guidance system, developed by Hinch (~), was used

to steer the test vehicle. Photographs of the guidance system

2

fiRE STATION •

HEV 1195

ANNUAL RATE OF CHANGE ~ JUlY

RWY 17l· lSR 0.20 w S46, T60

RWY 17R·35l __ 5 100. T200, TT400

RWY 14·32 5100, Tl70,

"

" •

''''' "70

/'

•

G ENERAL AVIATION

/ PARKING

BUILDING ~

* 1311

• NEBRASKA ANG

NEBRASKA NA nONAl GUARD •

,

FIGURE 1. FULL- SCALE VEHICLE CRASH TEST FACILITY

3

GUIDE FLAG SHEARED OFF

, - - -~'- Y ",_ ' .- r '-' J - " 'I " . V" "'O -- - -' ..... ..' "

"--Cr< U TE

(TOW CABLE) RELEASED

, 3 II ------

! Ys OfA . GU/~~ C/1BLE

" 1% CIA. TOW-"'-I CABLE

1

~)-STANCHIONS I

.rc -F ' F Y .., / .... ---

TOil VEHICLE

I ; 2 ,VlFC-1~ , Vl_;"~

AD ,,'.';'NTAGE

GUIDE_~~ FLAG 0 CRASH TEST

VO SCAL E

U VEHICLE

FIGURE 2. SKETCf-'

TO v'/ AND

4

OF '~ABL ::

GUIDANCE SYSTEMS

---~~----~

FIGURE 3 . PHOTOGRAPHS OF TOW VEHICLE AND FIFTH WHEEL

5

are shown in Figure 4. and a sketch of the guidance system is

shown in Figure 2. The guide-flag, attached to the front left

wheel and the guide cable, was sheared off (at the distances

stated above) before impact with the Box-Aluminum Bridge Rail.

The 3/8-in. diameter guide cable was tensioned to 3,000 lbs., and

it was supported laterally and vertically every 100 ft. by hinged

stanchions. The hinged stanchions stood upright while holding up

the guide cable. When the vehicle passed, the guide-flag struck

each stanchion and knocked it to the ground. The vehicle

guidance system was approximately 1,5 00 ft. in length

2.2. Brjdge ~ Design Details

An overall view of the Iowa Box-Aluminum Bridge Rail is

shown in the photographs in Figure 4, and detailed drawings are

shown in Figures 5 and 6. Excluding the concrete end walls, the

box-aluminum bridge rail was approximately 86 ft. in length. The

bridge rail consisted of four major components: the concrete

curb , aluminum posts, aluminum rail members, and concrete end

walls.

The 12-in. concrete curb was constructed with a Nebraska

Class 47-B-PHE mix design. The concrete compressive strength

the time of the crash tests averaged about 6,000 psi

Appendix A). The curb was 20-in. wide and 86 ft. in length.

at

(see

The

curb was anchored 8-in. into the existing airport concrete apron

by 2 L-shaped No.5 rebar dowels, spaced at 14-in. on centers

over the length of the curb . An epoxy grout material was used as

the bonding agent for the dowels.

6

FIGURE 4 . PHOTOGRAPHS OF VEHICLE GUIDANCE SYSTEM

7

v

" ( '"

'0

, 0

'"

9

9 m

8 m

8f>' . o· . ,

6 5 tSPUCE 4 3 2

~"

AI ELEVATION VIEW

7654321

~ m ~'" m!

~ ~:800LBHONDA 4,500 LB CADILLAC TEST 11 -1 TEST 11 -2

A) PLAN VIEW

FIGURE 5. SKETCH OF THE IOWA BOX-ALUMINUM BRIDGE RAIL

.,

'.

]

,

"

" 1 VAAl ES " ,

10 TO ,·2

, '. , .. ~ .•

V .' . .. . ' ,. · ,, ;. . '. . · ... ,. ,.' ... NO. 5 • •

· .. • • '.

NO. 5 . ... . ':'." . .

. " .:. "',. , • ... ..

" .8!1: ..

5'

"

NO. 5

GUTTER E '"-LIN

'0 ,

--" EMB ED8

TYPICAL ENDWALL SECTION

, " 1 . 8

U

-~ 0 '" GUTTER , LINE . ~

'" S' ,

"- l{ I"-NO.6

" ... ,'.. . . : 0

Y~ -, , : l· ': .' - ,-. rl· ," .

NO.5

NO. 5 ,

NO.5 AT EMBEDS ~NOWAU. , ,

~ 1 • 211< _[

TYPICAL CURB SECTION

NOTE: ALL REINFORCING STEEL IS GRADE 60

o o

"1[""" ................. <. 4 % L'i> ....................... .f , "

U " , " , " , , " , . " , , " , , " , , " , , " , , " ,

~:::: ::::: ::::: :::::: ::: :~ . " , I " , ,

Yo! HEX. STAINLESS r-:-+-+-"'·HE'X. STAINLESS +E+ ... :i ... STEEL NUT AND

STAINLESS STEEl WASf£R

= ..... STEEl NUT ANO ST~LESS STEEL WASf£R

Yl'x7o/l' ::=::-tj=~9t=-;~~~,,, lHREADED sn..o CIA. X 9 (A215 STAINLESS)

(AVe STAINLESS)

REGUlAI1-sa~AA1, S1I"'- NUT

TYPICAL POST AND ANCHOR PLATE ASSEMBLIES

~lt~ " " "

FIGURE 6. TYPICAL SECTIONS OF BRIDGE RAIL 9

The eleven 27 1/4-in. aluminum posts were spaced 8 ft.-2 in.

o n centers. Stainless steel bolts were used in the post anchor

base assembly. The lower and upper box rail members supported by

the posts were located at heights of 13-in. and 25-in. above the

top of the curb, respectively. Each rail member contained two

splices located 26 ft.-6 in. from the post on each end.

2.3. ~ Vehicles

Two different test vehicles were used to evaluate the Iowa

Box-Aluminum Bridge Rail.

For Test I1-1 , a 1982 Honda Civic weighing approximately

1,800 lbs. was used as the crash test vehicle. For Test 11-2, a

1982 Cadillac Coupe Deville weighing approximately 4,310 lbs.

was used as the crash test vehicle. Photographs of the two test

vehicles are shown in Figure 7. Dimensions of the test vehicles

are shown in Figures 8 and 9.

The front wheels of both vehicles were aligned to a toe-in

value of zero-zero so that the vehicle would track properly along

the guide cable.

Two a-in. square, black and white checkered targets were

placed on the centerline of the roof of each test vehicle. For

Test 11-1, the front target was placed over the center of mass,

and the rear target was 4 ft. to the rear. For Test 11-2, the

front target was positioned over the center of mass, and the rear

target was 5 ft. to the rear. The targets were used in the

analysis of the high-speed film. In addition to roof targets,

side targets were also placed at known distances to aid in the

10

FIGURE 7. PHOTOGRAPHS OF TEST VEHICLES

11

I 1 f1 "

I ~II ' ;>

---wheel _ . .

• P base

I ~ ~

Tire dh ----t-.....J'-+­Wh.d dh ---tt--I.-t1r-

T

Ceolletry .. In . (In.)

• 62 . 2" b 29 . 5" c 88 , 6"

Ha .... Ib eke)

"1 "z "T h .. 1n. c.) 33" I" 1n. (.) 21.5"

d 53 . 2" • 28" f l48.4"

Curb

"a..nt. of Inerti. (lb-ft-aec2) aoll Yaw Pitch

f

j 18" II. 21.5" t 33"

llsa Ib 650 Ib

1800 Ib

~~~

•

• n -'4-.75'''' o 10"

1965 Ib

*R.ady tor te.t but •• clude. p •• ,«nalr/carlo payload **Cro •• r •• dy for t •• t includtn, p"'ln,er/clr,o p.y10ld

FICURE 8. VEHICLE DIMENSIONS FOR HONDA CIVlC 12

Q.. vehicle

k

P 53 . 5" r 14 . 2" • 22 . 6"

d

'" H

" " '" '" ~ .

"" '" M '" H <"> ,. '" '" H

~ Z ~ H 0

~ ... Z W ~ ..,

0

'" <"> 1; ... ,. ,. ,. <">

<"> 0

" '" '" '" ... "" H

loo t ,. ,. '"

- - 1

11 I II u

-

\ 0

[00 \ r--

JL I u

--- ----.-- .---.

J B

.. . ~I -------4

c

----- --

+ A - Length B - Widt h

E

C - Height (unladen) D - Overhang, front E - Overhang, rear F - Ramp angle. front G - Ramp angle, rear H - Wheelbase J - Front track

Rear track K - Ground clearance L - Height of center

of mass M - Front axle to C.G.

219" 72" 55" 3 7" 57 " . 9"

I I . 9" 1 2 1 "

62" 61"

7 . 5"

22.6" 56.6"

c

evaluation process.

Two 5B flash-bulbs were mounted on the front hood of both

test vehicles to record the time of i mpact with the bridge rail

on the high-speed film. The flash bulbs were fired by a pressure

tape switch mounted on the front face of the bumper.

2. 4 . ~ Ac quisition Sys tems

2 . 4 . 1 . Accelero mete rs

Endevco triaxial piezoresistive accelerometers (Model 7264)

with a range of 200 g's were used to measure the accelerations in

the longitudinal, lateral, and vertical directions of the test

vehicle. The accelerometers were rig i dly attached to a metal

block mounted at the center-of-mass of the test vehicle.

Photographs of the accelerometers mounted in the test vehicle are

shown in Figure 10. The signals f r om the accelerometers were

received and conditioned by an onboard vehicle Metraplex Unit.

The multiplexed signal was then sent through a single coaxial

cable to the Honeywell (101) Analog Tape Recorder in the central

control van. A flowchart of the accelerometer data acquisition

system is shown in Figure 11, and photographs of the system

located in the test vehicle a nd the cent r ally controlled step van

are shown in Figures 10 and 12. The latest state-of-the-art

computer software, "Computerscope and nsp," was used to analyze

and plot the accelerometer data on a Cyclone 3S6/AT, which uses a

very high-speed data acquisition board.

2 . 4 .2. High- Speed Photography

Three high-speed 16 mm cameras we r e used to film the crash

14

I

/ /

FIGURE 10. PHOTOGRAPHS OF THE ONBOARD DATA ACQUISITION SYSTEM

15

r-::j

H C":l c::: :;d tTl

I--I--'

r-::j

l' 0 ~ n ::c ~ :::0 rl

0 t-rj

~ n n [T1 l'

f---l [T1 :;d

0'1 0

~ rl M :;d

d ~ rl ~

:J> n .0 c:::: H Ul H l-3 H 0 Z

U:l ,....c:: Ul rl [T1 3:

Tost. V~h1()lo

L

~ntru Control

V4D

L

-

Endevco Piezore:llS li ve

Accelerometer llodel 7284-200

Uetrapiex 300 Seriell

Endev<:o Piezorcsi3li. vc Acceleromelor

},lode I 7264-200

Signal Conditioning Section (up lA> 28 Acoel.erometers) Conditioner Card. 341la.,340b,340d

r~ !tulllplox1ng Seot1on (7 AccalaromeLen Per ChAnnal 4 Channet. UZlX.)

FW COllI: Cablo (up to 1500 t&et)

-

(1 from 4 c~. • all ... cb4nncb m..ay be \.l:Icd for A toW 01 28 Lrall6duccl15 to)

Honeywell Wodel 101 14 Channel ~agnoUc

Tape IWcorder

"'\/

Welraplex 100 SerLe:a FW D&mOdulator

(u:sW& model 120 FW Dcmod'a)

.. GtliIi of 10 •

/

/

Cyber Research Cyclone 386/AT Computer­

Wilh CyberRcaC4n::h Very Htgh ~ed AID Bo6.rd

(12 bi.t reiiolullwl) (Up to lWh Sample Rale)

D.!Ila is: 1. Stored 2. Deri-...::d 3. lntegr&t.ed "'. plotted

TEST RESULTS

1. Vehicle Change-in-Speed 2. Occupont DiI.placement 3. Occupant Impact Vol~lt.y 4. Occupant Ridedown

Aooelorcation

l

FIGURE 12 . DATA RECORDER AND 386/AT COMPUTER

17

tests. The cameras ran at approximately 500 frames/sec. The

overhead camera was a Red Lake Locam with a wide angle 12.5 mm

lens. It was placed approximately 53 ft. and 61 ft . above the

concrete apron for Test 11-1 and Test 11-2, respectively. The

perpendicular camera was a Photec IV with a 55 mm lens. It was

placed 165 ft. from the vehicle point of impact. The parallel

upstream camera was also a Photec IV with an 80 mm lens. It was

placed upstream and offset 3 ft. from a line parallel to the

bridge rail.

Figure 13.

A schematic of the camera layouts are shown in

A 20 ft. wide by 115 ft. long grid layout was painted on the

conc rete slab parallel and perpendicular to the barrier. The

white-colored grid was incremented with 5 ft. divisions in both

directions to give a very visible reference system which could be

used in the analysis of the overhead high-speed film.

The film was analyzed using the Vanguard Motion Analyzer.

The camera divergence corr ection factors were also taken into

consideration in the analysis of the high-speed film.

2.4.3. Speed ~ Switches

Eight tape pressure switches spaced at 5 ft. intervals were

used to determine the speed of the vehicle befor e and after

impact. Each tape s wi tch fired a blue 5B flash-bulb located near

each switch on the concrete slab as the left front tire of the

test vehicle passed over it. The average speed of the test

vehicle between the tape s witches was determined by knowing the

distance between pressure switches, the calibrated camera speed,

18

1 I 11 11 I .II I 11 1 I o

PEFfPENDICULAR PHOrJEC I!Z CAMERA

I . I

1j I

I I

.Jo, I •, I 1

13. LOfA liiONS i

I

I .. I I

I I I I I

I I I I

HOTEC JY CAM[

-~- -- r -~~ - ---

--- ~; i~ jd 1·1!~ ,

I I I

I

!NO !SCA~E

and the number of frames from the high-speed film between

flashes. In addition, the average speed was determined from

electronic timing mark data recorded on the oscilloscope software

used with the 386/AT computer as the test vehicle passed over

each tape switch.

2.5. ~ Parameters

Two full-scale vehicle crash tests were conducted on Iowa's

Box-Aluminum Bridge Rail as shown in Figures 5 and 6.

Test 11-1 was conducted at a target impact speed of 60 mph

with an impact angle of 15 degrees. A 1982 Honda Civic weighing

1,800 lb. was used as the crash test vehicle. The location of

impact was at the first rail splice 26 ft.-6 in. upstream from

the centerline o f the first rail post.

Test 11-2 was conducted at a target impact speed of 60 mph

with an impact angle of 25 degrees. A 1982 Cadillac Coupe

Deville weighing 4.310 lb. was used as the crash test vehicle.

The location of impact was at the center of the span containing

the second rail splice. The impact point was

upstream from the centerline of the first rail post.

20

53 ft.-1 in.

3. PERFORMANCE EVALUATION CRITERIA

The safety performance objective of a highway appurtenance

is to minimize the consequences of a vehicle leaving the roadway

to create an off-road incident. The safety goal is met when the

appurtenance (Box-Aluminum Bridge Rail) smoothly redirects the

vehicle away from a hazard zone without subjecting the vehicle

occupants to major injury producing forces.

Safety performance of a highway appurtenance cannot be

measured directly, but it can be evaluated according to three

major factors: (1) structural adequacy, (2) occupant risk, and

(3) vehicle trajectory after collision. These three factors are

defined and explained in NCHRP 230 (~).

The test conditions for the matrix are shown in Table 1.

Also, the specific evaluation criteria used to determine the

adequacy of the barrier are presented.

After each test, the vehicle damage was assessed by the

traffic accident data scale (TAD) (~) and the vehicle damage

index (VDII ( ll.

Because test conditions are sometimes difficult to control,

a composite tolerance limit is presented. It is called the

impact severity (IS). For structural adequacy.

for the actual impact severity to be greater

it is preferable

than the target

value rather than being below it. The IS target values are shown

in Table 1. Thus, for Test 11-1, the IS target values range from

12 ft-kips to 16 ft-kips. For Test 11-2, the IS target values

range from 88 ft-kips to 114 ft-kips.

21

Table 1 Crash Tes t Conditions and NCHRP 230

Safety Evaluation Criteria

Taq~et lm~act Taq~ec ImEi.lct Test Vehicle Speed Angle Severity Evaluation

ppurtenance Designa tion Type (mph) ( deg) (ft-kips) I mpact Point Cri teria·

l.ongitudinal Barrier

Box-Aluminum For pos t and beam systems , vehicle Bridge Rail iSa

14- 2, +2 should contact railing splice.

Test No . ll-1 12 1800 lb 60 15 A,D,E,F,H,I

Box-Aluminum Fo r post and beam sys tems, midway Bddl!!,t: Rail i20a

97-9.+17 between posts in span containing Test No. ll-2 10 4500 lb 60 25 railing s plice. A,D,E,H,I

*Applicable Evaluation Criteria 1. Structural Adeq uacy

A. Test article shall smoothly redirect the vehicle; the vehicle shall not penetrate or go over the installation although controlled lateral deflection of the test vehicle is acceptable .

'" N D. Detached elements. fragments. or other debris from the test article shall not penetrate or show potential for penetrating the passenger compartment or present undue hazard to other traffic.

2. Occupant Risk E. The vehicle

acceptable. intrusion .

sha l l remain upright during and after collision although moderate roll, pitching. and yawing are Integrity of the passenger compartment must be maintained with essentially no deformation or

F. Impact velocity of front seat occupant against vehicle interior shall be less than: 30 fps (Longitudinal) and 20 fps (Lateral). (Calculated at 24" forward and 12" lateral displacements). Vehicle highest 10 msec average decelerations subsequent to instant of hypothetical passenger impact should be less than: 15 g's «Longitudinal) and 15 g's (Lateral).

J. Vehicle Trajectory H. After collision, the vehicle trajectory and final stopping position shall intrude a minimum distance. if at

all , into adjacent traffic lanes.

I. In tests where the vehicle is judged to be redirected into or stopped while in adjacent traffic lanes, vehicle speed change during test article collision should be less than 15 mph and the exit angle from the test article should be less than 60 percent of the test impact angle, both measured at time of vehicle loss of contact with test device.

The formula used to calculate impact severity (IS) is given

as follows!

where m - vehicle test inertial mass (slugs)

v - impact velocity (fps)

e - impact angle (deg)

23

4 . TEST RESULTS

4 . 1 . = lIO...- l..l.=.1.

Test 11-1 was conducted with an 1,800 lb. Honda Civic under

the impact conditions of 56.8 mph and 15 deg. A summary of the

tests results is shown in Figure 14.

Upon impact with the bridge rail, the right front wheel of

the vehicle collapsed inward allowing the vehicle to begin a

clockwise rolling motion toward the bridge rail. The vehicle

remained in contact with the bridge rail for approximately 13 ft.

after initial impact. The car began to skid on its right side

while traveling in a direction essentially parallel to the bridge

rail. After the vehicle had traveled past the end of the bridge

rail, it began a counterclockwise yaw motion. This yaw motion

combined with the rolling motion allowed the vehicle to skid on

its right side on the concrete airport apron and begin to roll.

The vehicle came to rest 112 ft. from initial point of impact

after making two complete rollovers.

Photographs of the vehicle damage are shown in Figure 15.

As evident, the vehicle damage was extensive. The TAD and VDr

damage classifications are shown in Figure 14. Photographs of

the minimal damage to the bridge rail are shown in Figure 16.

From the overhead high-speed camera, the dynamic deflection of

the upper rail me mber was determined to be approximately

2 1/4-in. No permanent set had occurred in the lower and upper

rail members.

Before vehicle impact with the b r idge rail, the coaxial

2 4

r so

Test No. Date Installation

Drawing No. Length (ft)

Beam Rail Member Length

so 2

Top Rail (ft) Bottom Rail (ft)

Maximum Deflections Permanent

Top Rail (in) .• Bottom Rail (in),

Dynamic Top Rail (in) . . Bottom Rail (in).

Post Material Dimensions and Weight Spacing (ft)

Vehicle Model • Weight

Test Inertia (lb) Dummy (lb) Gross Static (lb)

15 at;=;::;... 3 4

II -I 8/2/88

w w w 5 6 7

PLAN VIEW

Iowa BRF- OOOS(2)-38-00 100

Box-Aluminum

86.83 86.25

None None

2.2 1.0 (est.)

Aluminum W7x7.1 8.17

1982 Honda Civic

1800 165

1965

so 8

so 9

Vehicle Speed Impact (mph) Exit (mph)

Vehicle Angle

so 1 0

w ; 0-

-;, 1 1

TYPICAL SECTION

56.8 47.9

Impact (deg). 15 Exit (deg). . 4.2

Vehicle Snagging None Vehicle Stability Rollover Occupant Impact Velocity (before rollover)

Longitudinal (fps). . . . . . NA Lateral (£ps) . . . . . . . . 8.9

Occupant Ridedown Accelerations Longitudinal (g's). Lateral (g's)

NA 3.9

s

Vehicle Damage TAD ••••• VDI ...•.

Extensive I-RFQ-5.I-LFQ-3.I-R&T-3 01FYA03

Vehicle Rebound Distance (ft) Bridge Rail Damage . . . . .

25 Minimal

FIGURE 14. TEST 11-1 SUMMARY AND SEQUENTIAL PHOTOS

--

-----

FIGURE 15. PHOTOGRAPHS OF VEHICLE DAMAGE, TEST 11-1

26

•

AJ /.

FIGURE 16. PHOTOGRAPHS OF BOX-ALUMINUM BRIDGE RAIL DAMAGE, TEST 11-1

27

cable over which the multiplexed accelerometer signals are sent

to the Honeywell Magnetic Recorder in the central control van had

caught on one of the cable guidance stanchions and broke. The

occupant risk values shown in Figure 14 were therefore determined

from an analyses of the high-speed film before the vehicle had

started to yaw and rollover. The calculations of the lateral

occupant impact velocity and the late ral occupant ridedown

deceleration are presented in Appendix B.

28

4 _ 2 _ Tf>.a.:t. I!a... Ll=.2.

Test 11-2 was conducted with a 4,310 lb. Cadillac Coupe

Deville under the impact conditions of 62.2 mph and 25 degrees.

A summary of the test results is shown in Figure 17.

Upon impact with the bridge rail, the right-front corner of

the vehicle became wedged between the concrete curb and the lower

aluminum bridge rail. The vehicle continued to travel forward

until the right front corner and bumper of the vehicle snagged on

post No. 8. That, plus the force from the horizontal rail,

caused the post with the attached base post assembly to break

away from the concrete curb. When the vehicle began to travel

past post No.8, the front section of the vehicle (including the

engine portion) buckled to the right. At that stage, the

majority of the right-front side had been crunched inward due to

the severe snagging. The vehicle continued to travel down the

bridge rail to the next rail post (No.9). At post No.9, the

front bumper finally detached from the car due to snagging. The

vehicle then was redirected off the bridge rail after being in

contact for approximately 14 ft.

A review of the damage to the car indicates that there was

considerable contact of the vehicle ' s undercarriage against the

12" high concrete curb and considerable damage resulted from this

contact.

Photographs of the vehicle damage are shown in Figure 18.

As evident, the vehicle damage due to snagging was extensive

while considerable undercarriage damage occurred due to contact

29

w o

r

IMPACT

w 1

Test No .. . Date ... . Installation

Drawing No. Length (ft)

Beam Rail Member Length

Top Rail (ft) Bottom Rail .

.. 2

Maximum Deflections Permanent Top Rail (in) . .

Bottom Rail (in) Dynamic

Top Rail (in) . . Bottom Rail (in)

Post Material Dimensions and Weight Spacing (ft)

Vehicle Model . Weight

Test Inertia (lb) Dummy (lb) Gross Static (lb)

.. 3

0.036 S 0.120 S

.. 4

w 2 St>. w

5 6 7

PLAN VIEW Il-2 8/3/88

Iowa BRF-OOOS(2)-38-00 100

Box-Aluminum

86.83 86.25

Lateral - 2.31 Vertical - 2.69 Lateral - 4.0 Vertical - 3.63

7.5 8.0 (est.)

Aluminum W7 x 7.1 8.17

1982 Cadillac Coupe Deville

4310 165

4475

w 8

0.152

.. w 9 10

Vehicle Speed Impact (mph) Exit (mph)

Vehicle Angle Impact (deg) Exit (deg)

Vehicle Snagging

5

w l' 1 1

•

Vehicle Stability Occupant Impact Velocity

Longitudinal (fps) Lateral (fps) . . . . .

Occupant Ridedown Accelerations Longitudinal (g's) Lateral (g's)

Vehicle Damage TAD •.... VDI ....•

Vehicle Rebound Distance (ft) Bridge Rail Damage . . . . .

FIGURE 17. TEST 11-2 SUMMARY AND SEQUENTIAL PHOTOS

0.246 S

TYPICAL SECTION

62.2 34.9

25 8.6

Severe Satisfactory

41.4 15.6

8.1 16.2 Extensive 1-FR-7.1-RFQ-7 OlFFAW2

9 Extensive

FIGURE 18. PHOTOGRAPHS OF VEHICLE DAMAGE, TEST 11-2

31

FIGURE 19. PHOTOGRAPHS OF BOX-ALUMINUM BRIDGE RAIL DAMAGE, TEST 11-2

32

with the concrete curb. The TAD and VD1 damage classifications

are shown in Figure 17. Photographs of the extensive damage to

the bridge rail are shown in Figure 19.

Graphs of longitudinal and lateral deceleration, vehicle

change in speed, lateral occupant impact velocity, and

longitudinal and lateral occupant displacement versus time are

given in Appendix C.

After the test, the permanent set was measured and is shown

in Figure 20. The maximum lateral dynamic deflection was

7 1/2-in. as determined from the o verhead high-speed camera.

After Test 11-2, it was observed that the placement of the

reinforcement steel was improperly placed. The bars misplaced

were the top two longitudinal bars, the horizontal bent No. 6

bar, and the vertical dowels which were bent off too short.

Thus, it created 3 1/2-in. of concrete cover. A sketch of the

misplaced curb reinforcement steel is shown in Figure 21.

The Civil Engineering Department at the University of

Nebraska and the 1DOT felt that this apparent misplacement of the

steel did not effect the testing, see Appendix D.

1>1

33

... ' ,.. '. 461 1113

I : I I ! I

I

I .

I ,;] l lij·~ "

~~~ ' I I .. ' 1m! I ' I I I .F.tr:l -, I I I: I II I 'TJ Ill I I I :11, 111 I 11'1 J ll ll u ~~~Ill' I I !II ~: ' • ':l

·· ··· riJ. : ~1 r 1 ur ~ rr ; I[' ,1, ~:1'.! li :l~t! i[!: ~~~'I 1 i .: , , 'I!. '" ··: ~l!ll!J I .• kr r ' lli$'~ 11 :I'll'; [r; 1 ·

"1! 1;;·1· rl .. ;;:I liT·~; ~ ~tit ~·~! I 1

jil.:, r J,·~·. 1

1 !1 ~,· :,1

··, ... 1::!~ H:1 ir.·.·, ~· ~i'.· ·:H ~: : .. ·,::.· · ~~~ ~ 1-1 "'1 ~ ;·· • ll.i l; ffi, ~. l ' ! ~; :[·i, 11l·:,.; j'j:, ~ ... I j·. ~l·, 1 fl !,l'1, I~ W' ~~ " ,, .n: n. r :,I! r:il,·h ... ;+ ; ! . ..~ !J !Ill ;j- :j!! !ll :· l~, 'I· !!L . , ·. . .' .. ' I' ' .. I I I .,q ]0: I I I HJ.IAAt.lmH!l~HioU I I I I :1 lrfl : I , I ' II!- cL J 3 I A : iii I .~ ' Ill: 8 7 1:! .. I :I! i I ; ''I ; I ~,II I I N' :! ~ . m· lri· !r: il r:) II .II : . f ~ l : :~I

lJ :.·1 ·l-j'hi jf " 1 1 11, 11 1· iJ: II'· ' ·,, i' • I, 1

: rr, ·· · ,, . il' : · ' 1 'I ···

I "I iiJ I!!jl Ill : Iii il· I I I • ,;: nli :! , l 111ri; 'lj. I. : . I• 'II:: 11 I,!, l,,lrl. II I ~ '! ':.

#' ~· :,~~,'1 I :1. i I : '!r :~ li.r I t i. I ' ~ rl iiir '~ ~ , o.~ :~ ~~· r: ··~ rii:: li f: 1[1111 !: ... ' f '., • I ~-~,· IJ1T ~ .. 1' ' I 11,1] ': f JJ I II IT 0 . .. ' I! ,. ;!"!'I'!. .., 1'· 11 !I ' I I I Ill II

I I 'jl .l •.',' · .. I',·, I. I I'· :.,1 I. 'I 'I 1": w . i· I ! 1'

1 I. .: i I j.i I ; . ··:,1' .l:>o ~·· ~~-j .. ,IIi.·~·'"· ~·-''· •lj I,. ,' ••••• 'II I II il'i'l !ll!l 1!': ,, II I ~,;!,I I ., I I !I I I I II " I

I ' I. I' I I! 1.1 ' ll, :, I, 11.! !li I II' rl I fl ;:1 '. '1, 1· fl [l rr,' rr I Jl I

·I ' : : I 'II i I I ' :I! I ' : I ' LLi I! I! lti' I I I I ' ,I • I: I I I I I' : ,. I I • LIT I • :u . I I • I I I I I! I

'I ,: 11i' ' r·t, "'j I r ·:! i~j 'ii . 1:;; ifl.l[i. i !-;· 1:1: :- i· .. ,, i ! . :, . ~ ~ ~ ~~ I; l~li~ . -li .. i. ... ': "; ' ..

Lj~trf~~~-~ ~~ i: 1,: i :: ·: :' :Ill, ill t+h I :i Il l Ill I !!, ' I: il l il .. \: ~ I ~tttt~ II i I '

I i' ·,ji· ~i . I II· I' II 1! .. 111 i!! '! 1, llil I!' I!., I : II! .!'11 : . 1!,!. !!:lll:i!llll I I !' 1! . 1[::1 :PI i'' I ill' ! :' ' ,, . I 'I

' i 1 ~. il .. '''! ·:, ' 1 1 1 111.11 1 1 · ,, ,'id 1: .:r I· :1 ! . . ·~ ·· • 11. ·1 ... , ' II ' .. I I "" 11 : ~ , :· .1 ~:1 I. I' i ' '!' 'II '!' II 'I ll r I II. il'l I • il II ' I .. II , J: ~r1' . I ' ' I I' I I • I' :~;, I u ill! ill! I' II II I I ~I#-~ L r l : • I I . 'II I· ' I . I ' 1iliJ i~!tt+t't"+tfH..IJ.Jlr.th I . , - .. ;,, .... ,:· .. . ... , .... " ~J H tfl' . • n -+'! u . I ~h.t~ , i · . . . '

I " ~ ~ H+1 . frr . ' I I : ' I ri l . .. I; I . rH L.L! ..__ '--. I I v.tJbT~C~L . I .. ll 111'11 ,., , ,_ -

80 ~t~M Al4 L :

V£PT!CtJ.4

., ,' : '!jl j: I .1. I

4 · It

3 2 ~; I a I·

-

...

FIGURE 21. Sketch Of ReinforceMent

Steel For Tosk 1

...,... ... rs

" .' ----j ~ t-l JI.- ~ -.

1 3/.-

Lf-VZ' ,L., 4 till,." l' • UIlI-

" 0

0 ~l f-' v.· 1 114'

P C

... ~

I 1" 114'

No ... ThIS Is ..... '-"oc."on 0' ............... et. SCALE', 1'=4' .".,.. frop! tM Orlglna.l construction pl1U\S,

35

..

5. CONCLUSIONS

Two full-scale crash tests were conducted to evaluate the

safety performance of the Iowa Box-Aluminum Bridge Rail. Test

11-1 was conducted with the impact location at a rail splice.

Test 11-2 wa s conducted with the impact location at the center of

the span which contained the second rail splice. The results of

the two tests are summarized in Table 2.

A safety evaluation summary for the two tests is given in

Table 3. The tests were evaluated in accordance with the

c riteria in NCHRP 230 (1).

The analysis of the two crash tests revealed the following:

~ ~~, 1,800 lb. vehicle

1. In Test 11-1, the bridge rail redirected the vehicle at

the allowable angle, but it was not a smooth result.

The excessive rolling motion along with the yaw motion

caused the vehicle to roll twice.

2. The vehicle did not rema in upright at all times. The

not integrity of the passenger compartment was

maintained. There was deformation and intrusion. The

unrestrained occupant was observed to be partially

hanging outside of the passenger window during vehicle

rollover. Many deep cuts were observed on the dummy.

36

Table 2 SUMMARY OF TEST RESULTS

Test No. 'rest Item

Il-1 Il-2

r:ehlc1e \/e 19ht ( lb ) 1800(1750-1850)2 4310 (4300-4700)

Impact 56.8 (60)2 62.2 ( 60 ) l r:ehlcle Speed (mph)

Exit 47.9 34.9

Impact 15 (15) 2 25 (2 5)2 ~ehlcle Angle (deg)

Exit 4.2 8.6

~ctual Impact Severity 13.0 (12-16)1 99.9 (88-114 )1 (ft-k Ips)

vehicle Rebound Distance (ft) 25 9

TAD 1-RFQ-5,1-LFQ-3, 1-FR-7,1-RFQ-7 1-R&T-3

vehicle Damage vor 01FYA03 01FFAW2

Longitudinal NA (30)3 41. 4 ( 30 ) 3 Occupant Impact

8.9 4 (20) 3 (20) 3 Velocity (fps) Lateral 15.6

Vehicle Highest 0.010 sec

(15)3 (15) 3 Average Decele- Longitudinal NA 8.1 ration ( 9 IS)

3.9 4 ( 15 ) 3 (15) 3 (Occupant Rlde- Lateral 16.2 ~own Decelera-tion)

Old Snagging Occur? No Yes

Old Car Rollover Occur? Yes (Twice) No

1 2 allowable range of values target values

3 maximum allowable values 4 values determined from high-speed film analysis without

consideration of rol11ng motion NA - Not Available: Occupant unable to travel 24 inches in

longitudinal direction before rolling of vehicle occurred.

37

Table 3 SAFETY EVALUATION SUHHARY

Evaluati on Eval uati on Test Fa c t ors Criteria 1 1

structural A. Test arti c le shall smoothly redirect Adeq uacy vehicle; the vehicle shall not penetrate

or g o over the installation although con - U tr o lled lateral deflection of the teBt vehicle i s ac ceptable.

D. Detached elements, fragments, or other debris from the test arti c le shall not penetrate or show potential for penetra - S ting the passenger compartment or present undue hazard to other traffic.

Occupant E. The vehicle shall remain upright during Risk and after cOllisi on although moderate r o ll,

pitching, and yawing are acceptable. Inte - U grlty of the passenger compartment must be maintained with essentially no deformati on or intr usi on.

F. Impact velocity of front seat occupant against vehicle interior shall be less thar 30 fps (Longitudinal) and 20 fps (Lateral) . (Calculated at 24" forward and 12" lateral displacements) . Vehicle highest 10 msec S average decelerations subsequent to instant of hypothetical passenger impact sh ould be less than: 15 g's (Longitudinal ) and 15 g's (Lateral) .

Vehi c le H . After c oll i sion, the vehicle trajecto ry Trajectory and final stopping positi on shall intrude U

minimum distance, if at all, int o adjacent traff ic lanes .

1. In tests where the vehicle Is judged t o be redirected into or stopped while in ad-jacent traff Ic lanes, vehi c le speed change during test article c o llision should be less than 15 mph and the exit angle fr om S the test article should be less than 60 percent of the test impact angle, both measured at time of vehicle loss of con -tact with test device.

S - Satisfactory U - Unsatisfactory NA - Not Applicable

NR - Not Required H Marginal

38

No . 11 2

U

U

U

NR

S

NA

3. The vehicle trajectory and final stopping distance,

intruded into the adjacent lane. This would pose a

hazard to oncoming traffic.

4. The actual impact severity was within the recommended

limits. The test was taken to be valid.

Iaat ~ l~' 4,310 lb. vehicle

1. The vehicle was not smoothly redirected. Severe

vehicle snagging occurred while the right front portion

of the vehicle was in contact with the two box-aluminum

rails and also with the aluminum posts.

2. Post No.8 and the attached rail broke away from the

concrete curb.

3. The integrity of the passenger compartment was not

maintained. There was deformation and intrusion. The

dummy received a serious injury when its right leg was

detached from the torso.

4. For Test 11-2, the accelerometer data used for occupant

risk is not required, but it is presented for added

information purposes. It is noted that the

longitudinal impact velocity and the lateral occupant

ridedown deceleration do not meet the suggested

criteria.

5. The actual impact severity was within the recommended

39

limits. The test was taken to be valid.

Based upon the above listed items, the results of the two

tests are not acceptable according to the NCHRP 230 guidelines

ell.

40

6. REFERENCES

1. "Recommended Procedures for the Safety Performance Evaluation of Highway Appurtenances," National Cooperative Highway Research Program Report 230, Transportation Research Board, Washington, D.C., March 1981.

2. Hinch, J., Yang, T-L. and Owings, R., "Guidance Systems for Vehicle Testing," ENSCO, Inc., Springfield, VA, 1986.

3.

4.

" Vehicle Traffic National

Damage Scale for Traffic Accident Investigators , " Accident Data Project Technical Bulletin No .1, Safety Council, Chicago, Ill., 1971.

"Collision J224 Mar Engineers,

Deformation Classification, Recommended Practice 80," SAE Handbook Vol. 4, Society of Automotive Warrendale, Penn .• 1985.

41

7 . APPENDICES

42

APPENDIX A.

CONCRETE COMPRESSIVE STRENGTHS

AND DESIGN MIX

4 3

':1-1';

STATE OF NEBRASKA DEP __ .~.1ENl .... RO._ ... Project Q f\ F ~ uoo 5 (" 1 - 38 -uu

Slj~l}~Y OF CO}l?RESSIVE STRENGTH TEST DATA FOR PORTL.o\.,\1) CEHE~l' CONCRETE CYLUlDERS

CeMent,

Clln of CQ"(rct' _________ _

~.v_ . _ '" 1,;,11 .J,.C"'I',,"'-t· ... ..) ,"'1'1 I"'( \ • k S.

Ad .. i .. l .. rc -P'7'f;,:>,. 1/.~-;(p,?O-kf1~ Pil Location lJ...:h 1~~1-) I}e /'ct.. L.. ,

---l---I-I------I----I--I--l---l---- ~ 1- j ~ ~ -+!--~I---------+-4-+-~-~~j~:j j j j

-1-----

---~--+---------~~~--~-I-~~ / / / /_~~---I 1// / /

FIGURE A-i. CONCRETE COMPRESSIVE STRENGTHS FOR lliteriah & relics Division

Fjne Agg

1477#

w/c = 0.41

Fine Agg = Coarse Agg = Cemen t = Water = Air =

MIX DESIGN FOR IOWA PROJECT

PROTECTION BARRIERS

Class "47 - B- PHE" Mix

Coar6e Agg Cement

1477# 705#

1477 lb. = 9.0343 ft3

1477 lb. = 8.9320 ft3

705 lb. = 3.5867 ft3

289 lb. = 4.6314 ft3

3.0% = 0.8100 ft3

26.99 44 ft3

Fine Agg . Sp. Grav. = 2.62

Coarse Agg. Sp. Grav. = 2.65

Cement Sp. Grav. = 3.15

Water

289#

FIGURE A- 2. CONCRETE DESIGN MIX

45

Ail::

3.0%

APPENDIX B.

OCCUPANT RISK DETERMINATION

46

.. "

~ .'!! ~ ~

...a 0 50 -+'

-., 5::

~ .. lL 40 '-' ::n

-+-.-8 ~1..30 -4-

<1-"'" >-Q)

-+-d !lO

-J

10

Ca.lcula.+ion of Oc.cu.po..rrt Impad Ye Ioc/'f.~ a.nd Ridedown Decelera.+ion

Te.st No. I I-I Occupo.nt II7lf'<lc:l-: tro.vded 12 In. lo..-&.ra.115

a:t 'lTms('£

8.+",

'7maec. i$ fl"o.mI!.S o ~ ____ ~ ____ ~ ______ ~ ____ ~ ____ ~ ______ ~ ____ ~~ __ __

o 7S IOD ISO 17S

Time (sec)

APPENDIX C.

ACCELEROMETER DATA ANALYSIS

C-l. Graph o f Longitudinal Deceleration , Test Il-2 49

C-2. Graph of Longitudinal Deceleration, Test Il-2 50

C-3. Graph of Vehicle Change in Speed, Test Il-2 51

C-4. Graph of Vehicle Change in Speed, Test 11-2 52

C-5. Graph of Longitudinal Occupant Displacement, Test Il-2 53

C-6. Graph of Longitudinal Occupant Displacement , Test Il-2 54

C-7. Graph of Lateral Deceleration , Test Il-2 55

C-8. Graph of Lateral Deceleration, Test Il-2 56

C-9. Graph of Lateral Occupant Impact Velocity, Test Il-2 57

C-10 . Graph of Lateral Occupant Impact Velocity , Test Il-2 58

C-11. Graph of Lateral Occupant Displacement, Test 11-2 59

C-12. Graph of Lateral Occupant Displacement , Test Il-2 60

48

__... Ill

{.!) '-"

00 :> tU

u Cl.l (/)

13 0 ......

c 0

·rl 4-1 tU

4>- '"' Cl.l 1..0 .......

Cl.l u Cl.l A ....... tU p

•rl '0 ;:I

4-1 •rl 00 c 0

....:I

IIZt..OI Mltlt++~tllll.;!fltl•llltitllltiM!mll l .. ltlflfliltl!!illi'1 '111"'"'"<1•11111UI'UI!;II• .. IOIIIJI .. -IIIMitlolllt ltltll!ltllltll• l tiiMIII 1Nt i•+IIIIIIUIIIOI"IIIIIIIIIIII+IMI1111tllltiiiiiMIIII ... IOlOi oll'll+lllltlt!JII'llllfi• IIIMIII"IIIItl11tllollti M!IIIfllll lol.lltlltlfttl«t"l.llftll!lflllllllliHIIIIIIII+Miol"l ' l" ltl0111tltW!IIIIIil<llllllt l1tii'I IIII!J!tlll l111111ti"'I IIIUUIIIUUI+III IIIIUIIM!ol.loiiiUOII">.IUI 01fiUIII +ll<IUti iiOII"'''''"'"'"'' ' ' ' ' '''IioluU+ +IIUIII >I+i +II 0111!+0++11MIIiitiltiJI_I ... IIIhlfl.lillt 1\ otliiiii•+IIU!ol

l ('1 ti' ;. l.' I' I.J I ' ' I ~ l t·-1 1. 1 ~~~~ ,.. .. 1:::· I f I :~ 1"1 I "I '· iJ I ... ...... "' . ... ... - ..... -· ....... '' . . .. .... -- ........ , ... .... ... ...... .. . ... ......... .. ........ ' -- ... . - . .. ........ ... .... . . .. .. ... .... .... ... . .. . ... ' . . -..

- ···~· - ~- .. ·-------··~ ... ._ .................. . .. ..... -··- ......... . _,, __ __ · ·-······~·-··-· ............. ... _, ~. .. ....... ...... ... ~·

I I I I I 0

::::1.,1

I'J I 0

I. 1) ,

,, '

----- --r~\---- ... ---- --- -------- . ···---· -- -I I

- --·- -·- - -· . ·-~- ----········ ·-· -····--------· ··-···· ····-· •. ····· ...

II

..1-.... ,, I, I 'I .,

II / ·~ I' ~l ......... .

'·' 1) ....................................... .... , .. ' .................... , .. ,_., ............ ......... . ....................................... - ............. ' ................................. ............... ~ ...... .......... ' .......... .................. , ....... .

......... ,. ... ,. II • I (1 , .. , I I,. , .. ';: .... (t t ,::: ~::

'., ... , , ....... 111110010' .:~·.... ·• ..... ~::··:.:

II I .. •:·· I I 1 tt ( t 1 ,1 ' 1 t !::

tlllll lll'lt .. ,HHiol't•ttiUIItl.llltlflllfl ll.llllotl .. flllflfO"tll4ototOIIHI IIIIIIIItlllitl tll+llllllH.IU•tottlfiii!OI IHt •ll·lltlt ... lt OIOIOI"OIIII•IIIt lllloll +•ll lttoloill• l tttl1111"fl.t .... +omiiiOI .. IIto•llloiN•tt •"ooli +ttOft01t•lol~lllt .. llll"ltl lhtUIII•tlol11100l .. l!lllotloii•IIIIIOIOitllltlfi"'IOIIO•IIIIIHI .. IIIflo-oO"'Otllloloto .. lllllfllll llll liWMitiJ!IOOif!lt!tOfll01°lfltiiii"OIII "OI•If!IOOOOoltiOot•otiiO .. Iil11"'1 •otU•••flll'hOotot"OIIIti 'IOIIII!tti,.,WOOit!<OIOIII.,MI11°1(0!>"101°"'''' U"Itnoii OOo!l\ltO"O'OOOII • lflt+

Time (Sec)

FIGURE C-1. GRAPH OF LONGITUDINAL DECELERATION , TEST ll-2

. II2L.02.. !IIIII lll .. ll•+lti""''Uitl\lllllltlf!lllltiiiMollll•+tiMttltltltlflttlttiUitilltlllll .. loiiltltlltlllliO•Itllllll1111111111•1tl._.!tlllllltltltlolloltl iltlf!II•IOII IIOIIo .. lltllltll ltlt! OI•ttti iUIIIttii11Uf+lol llllilloiUotllolf;llfltiJI ... III nll~l"tllflllltl l"'lllflllllfltiiiMQIII!t!lllilllt!IIMIIAIIIIilloiWMIOIIIIIOIIIilllllltltltltlltlllt++•IIOI .. 01MIIIIillflloiiiiiUtllf"lllll lfi iiiU .. IIIMIIIIIIIollllll'lll. lfl+lflllll'"'>lll ' lfllolflllt"llilltlllllt01tlllol t"!llllf+lllolltloltloll'l .. fl.lfl ll •llti!IOjf!OIIol!ltMOOI .... t 111MifiOIItMiti .. II .. I!OIIIItiM I-o

( • 1· -1 (;. :1 . I I I l• :r I' ~ f1l. J:o 1::: C F I. 1:::· f'~ 1'1 I' J.: ,. .. , t I

"""' CJ)

(..') '-" .:.: f,l I ( I ... ' .......... _., ......................................... - ,_,, ............... - ........... ............ _____ ,_ ............. ..

00 ~ Ill

u C1.l CJ)

e 0 .....

C:l 0 'M ~ Ill

Ul ,... C1.l

0 ...-! C1.l u C1.l

0

1 ·--·- _ .. . ·t·j ------·-·-· .. ....... ... -.... ·- ·- --·----- --------- --- -----·--·--- -----·--- .. ........ ·-----·---·-- ..

IRI ~ I I I •,

''I 11 I

,, -·a.--11 -- _ __\ - - I V\ ...-! Ill C:l

'M '0

;:3 ~ 'M bl.l C:l 0 ~

I 1 I I 1

1 1\ II J \~f· I '1.

1 1

/ \ r~~ ~~ ··,, .. ,,/ ······\ 1 ,, I'• ,f I ~ .. ,

~I ·• ~., I ,,. ..,, I •. ' ••••••••..•

l, .. .... ,,,,,, •• •.•. ,>, 'ooo.,, ... ,,,,,,,- ,,, .. , ,,•,·,,·,0

,,0,0lo ••••••ooo•roo• o .,ooool

1,

0

,,,.. , •••• " . ,••,, 00,

0

,',

0

, ' :low;•ooo••',',,0,',',I.Ooo• ol

0,

11

u,,, t.,M ' '.', M,.', ','. ', ".,',,'1•1•0

, "1,',0 .... ....... .. ...................... , .. ........................... .. .......................................................................... -.. r ~; ...... . . \; ..... ,:;;<.. •. ••. .. - - . • • -

~

... .. .............. .. ' ... .. ..... ....... ....... .... , . . ... .•. ....... ... ... .. . .. ..... , .... ..... ....... ...... ,.,, ....... "'I "' ....................... , ...... . "'""'I ........... _, , ............. ........... ........ ..... .... .. .. , ..... , ..... , , .. •• ....... ..... ...... ' ... ,, .... _ .. •. .... • • •. ,

( I I , · j I :a (I I , -. ~ I ,.I I 'I ' I I :. I J I I I I ~~ •.:• 0 I ;:~ !::: 1._1 I ·::: , ., ( I j ·; I ~ ,· I I I I 1.1 I ,I ' I. J ~:-........ 1>111 oo .. •ti'IIOI tlt!lt !MH~liii.UioiOjlfiii!IUMitltiUitl&llltllt•t .. ltll llolo!Mplllfllitiorlfltl+lot""l IIWitlfiiiiiMI .. II IIt OIIaotoUIItt- l llolllllltiUIIOOOIIIltltlllolllll tUitlfllllltlli' IIUIOIIIIOIIIIII+IIIItii• •IIIHI•U tol>ill lllolllltiiiii" •IOitllllltiiUII!IIIIIIMitltllllloOIIIIIIIMitiiHIOO"fll.lltiM .. _Itoii:'MIOIIOIIIMIIIItltlt ltltiMIIOOitlfllfltoOOMIIilili '"' lltt+iiiiOOINitOIII oljjl !I l l lljOI •IIIIJI'W 10!101 11•11001111 II+IO .. OIIIIi ii · IOio IIIli"'' II ol_j!Jol ll>ll ll"l o tolot .. ifiMIMIIItlltiOIIOI•"Itl too•lotlll 0• •ofll oooto•o' otiWooOO

Time (Sec)

FIGURE C-2 . GRAPH OF LONGITUDI NAL DECELERATION, TEST 11-2

~ • p.

"' ~ .., • •

~ p.

'"' ~

" H

• '" " • .c u

• H U ~ .c • :>

... ,t ,(I

.., I.' ,Q

'II.' , • .'

-:, • I , ,~,

'-.'EH1:' L.E ,- HAIH::'E ] t·J SPEEr.

-- - - - -- -.~----

---- ------- - ---------- --- - -----

---1--~7 ~-/"

~4~3~-7~+-----~--~~/

--lI~---- ----- --------------1-----1--- --- -----

1'-' ,(I +--- I ~--

/

,. , , (0 --- --- --

----- -- ---

0) , 'J I.' 'I , " ~: ".1(' ':',lS " , ~. ( , ,) .. : ,0 "

"_" -r_ - ---

, ', . 1.1,"

• Normalized Occupant Impa c t Velocity (.A V) = (AV) (V s in & ) ta rget (V sin & ) actua l

(43 . '1 fps)~8§-=.J~~_ (91.4 fps)

FICURE C-J . CRAPII OF VEHICLE CHA NGE IN SPEED, TEST 11-2

:r; /ZLO/

Time (Sec) 1.1. 7fps

~

• 0-r. ~

~ • • W 0-

N ~

" H

• "" " • .c '-'

• H U ." .c • >

~: 0) , (0

:::; .:,. , (0

J. I) • (.

1", ,0)

VEHICLE C HAN GE I~l SPEED .----"= ----_. __ ._-_ .. _._._ .. __ • __ ._._ .. r--···--·~---~··-···· --r---­

42.S

- -'- --1----_. --\. .. __ . --.-.

--\.--- ---t-·-,...::rr '~~=,..c;:: ... /

,/

- .---~--

+--._ ... ----_...-

---- 7 ~-.--

+-_._----,1-._--- .---.- 1----.-. ,'/

/ f./

-¥------ ---- .-........ - .... ----.. -1-----.- ........ --

-+_ .. _._--_._-- _.

j to , (, - ___ ._. __ ------ .~.---,- .. ---,-. ----,,-""--0.---- --.---,---. - --_ ... ,_ .. '-"'- --'--'-'-' 1----- ...... - ... -..... . .. -.-.- -+-----........ --... - ....... -.---.-. --

" . ... (, ,:!,o)~ " lU .) J.S (1,2') ,j,2~: I).~:(, "' ~;<:" " , 't" ".~t !: :~--~~--~~~~~~---.

Normalized Occupant Impact Velocity (AV)- = (42.5 frs) (88 . 2 fps) (91.4 fps)

'" 41.0fps

FIGURE C-4. GRAPH OF VEHICLE CHANGE LN SPEED , TEST 11-2

Time (Sec)

.,....._ c::

H .......,

4-' c:: (IJ

13 (IJ (.)

I'd .-4 Q. Ill .,-1 0

4-'

U"l c:: I'd w 0.. ::I (.) (.)

0

.-4 tU c

·.4 "0 ::I w ..... 011 c:: 0

...:I

IIIIIIOIIt!MOOiiiMMI1"!!'1to.IIMtOWiol0!!1!11°1+11tltll!tOtiM•IIiliiiiii•IIIII>I •• I.IIIMIIIIIIItl ... llll.!ltltii>IIIUII .. MMIM!ItttMI•IW!III>II!" ' '""'''"'"' "IIUijlttiUMitiiiiiMI"IIII•Iti .. IIIIMIIIIIIII!ti.IUUIIIIIIIMQIII!f!IIMI!IIIJMI"IIflflloiiii"IIOIII!tllmUIIItii!MI•Itl1114111111+1tltlllllltlfiJII!tltl!ll.li .. IIIIIUII1flltlloiMitltii!IIIIMitltii.IUMI-IItllllfOOI IIOilt lfiii .. Otflllllllllfllltllllnf!IOittill•lhollllll4111tlllliol•llo4>1111•!110M,.IItllt! ... ;lf~!b,~.l ... ,.,,lltlfl!f:IIIIMII.IIIItiOII•Ifl •

... It II 1 II

1., f"t 1'1 1 II

I llll I • . •

I,, , .. IIF'I"'III 'I I'• J :.:;pI !'1• - l~: 111":"1 1 I

---

' ... - ...... - ... ·- _,., •.•... -· ............... _,.,_ 1-.. .. ...... - .......... -- -· ........ ,._ ..... _, ___ - - ...... .

t---=2=--~ ... =.0,.___-l------l---- -.,..,.'' "'"'~· .....,.. .....

~"' I'' I , .,..r'

I' , .. o

,-~······· .;·' ........

('t I u ,,., - ...................... ,,,, ; ' ;:•;• ·~ 4 .. , : .::· ,., 1 •· I -.... -..................... ~ ...... --. _ .. -· ........ .. ' ' - .... . ...... ' .. ·--

·- ·------- .... ··-···"'""-'"'" '" ......... ,,, I ·

,.• ................

1, 1 I II II II ' It 1.. II I I II I I I o: ( I t ... • II

,. ,_, ,4

' ..

II

...

II I '-Ill

.~ , .. o I o I

······ , .... .... ..

II I 'I' !o!I!>II• ..... MO•O•I•UhiMMIIMM .... ojOOOOMIOIM•IO•Iol•OOIIIM-••o-o.lolo •loiOieO•O ... !MIII!IIIIItloi ... II!IIIOO,.,. .... .;..,MWI-ol•,.loloi•OOI•IWIJIIOUIOJ!Mioo .. JIIIOIIoltlolloltOOOolllo!l,. ... •loltlot•IIII~•IUOII ..... oi ....... O•Ioi+••" IMOI! ' !oiHIII•Itll.lloi .. IIIIMMUWWio!tlil .... oiWIOIOtolflo ........ _IM-I:IMIIIol•lloOIIIOOO• >100'*""'1 loillll.,oooowo .. ,., .. ,,.,, .... ,,,,,,..,.,,OIIooto ,,..,, ,,,,., ,., ................. ,, .. ,, .. ,;1111•_+ ...... 10111-·0·t .. oooo f"'•IOOO .... toloo;ooo;o;oooM+-ftiiOO. •IO•I O•oOtl•l

Time (Sec)

FIGURE C-5. GRAPH OF LONGITUDINAL OCCUPANT DlSPLACEMENT, TEST ll-2

;-...

r:: H

w r:: Q)

a QJ u 1'0 rl 0.. (/)

•r-i A u

(Jl r:: 1'0

A 0.. ;:I 0 u 0

rl 1'0 r::

•.-i "0 ;:I w ·.-4 bO 0 0 ...l

I ··• I) l, l I 1.,1

.I)

... I}

" ..... - ................................ _, ................. ,,, ___ .......... , ,.,. , , .. u.l!~:~:··•·' ''''' , ... ........ .

, .I · ,,r"'"''·'' ............... ....

,,,,.,.r'

~ .. 0_ .... ........... ··· ~~~~~---r----------~~--------~·

I , _,- t• '" l"

, , .. -· ...... , .. _,_ , .,..·

·-ltllllii iiUIII Ide:::~ ; ~.::: •·:-~:.~.: •• :, ., "--

II I I, IIJ II l,,t ~;. II ,.,

' ' ' I o_. II ,: II

, .... ····· - -~ , ... , .

,• ' , ...... ····· ·······

..,_,,,_~--.......... _ .. , .. ·- -- ~·· ··' ' •' ,, ....... ..~

_,,·-•' •'' ·· ········

, • • j .... . . .

. I. " 'I ••

,,. •' , ... . ·•'

It , I f I,

• ' ' ,.

I>OIIf""l tlf>IOIUIOI!IIII il•l il ttlt IOtOitiiOIIII I " " l .. t•IM!Oho tii Oiiii .. UMIUI,.IIUiitiloiU~IdlloiiM.UI " l lfUU!tllfll!li!JIUII olool01 !UIII!I IIIUI.UIIIII IUO!tltiiiiOIII .. MIIIMifl III IUUI IUIIIolltMU! IIUIIIII .. Itlollllm lUI llti!IIIUUUII IOIMI UOUUit"l lotlfiJIIIIIIIOI IIt!I I'III'II IIIIII IUU.IIIMIH !it MIIM .. IIIliNIItiiOI .. "UUitU!IIIoiUIIII"MII"I"' " "UI•I<OI!OII !UIUI•! 111 .. 1-'l •llltll!'il Ut,IM"Iflll "'U!" !MM"" <1'"' .. •1.111"1!1111 ""'" "" " """" " ' UIIUI 'il '"' " fi>IMI" 1' ' '"''1"111 I!<IOI MII" 'I"•'• Ill"" I

Time (Sec)

FIGURE C-6. GRAPH OF LONGlTUOlNAL OCCUPANT DISPLACEMENT, TEST l-2

. :r/~L.

:::: " . (. ~

• " ~ 00 , •

:.;. (0 • 0 u • • • 0 ~

c 1 ,., , 0 '" 0

'" ~ ~

• " • ~ • U • 0

(I • (0 ~ • " • ~ • ..,

J " , I)

LATERAL DE ( EL E RAT I 0tl

;-. I- . '_v oooL - .~~ ~,

I- __ -+-_ L----,-=~ - --- , ---~ ---

1--------- -~- ----- - - - ---

... I -- ------ -- _. _--I J _.--- -.

.I ~I I;:\l I ~ "vv --· - ---.-,~ " _ __ if 'I ~.M ~-

- 1- -

"'.-£ >.......

.,"" .. --._. -_. ---. --- ---- i-- --- i - . - - ---'J , ( . " " , " ,- ".' , 1. ~ : " • :: 0) .. (0 • ;;:: s .-, " '.:' . ,L') ' :' • 'I' J ., . 'I'

Time (Sec )

FICURE C-7 . GRAPH OF LATERAL DECELERATION, TEST 11-2

LATERAL DECELERAT I ON ........... ,_ ... - ----.-.--.. "~-------- '.-.--.'-"'- ,-.-"---.-"-"--'---~-----------".-.-.----"

Lt.) , (I 1- - =I ,-----·-------r-·-- :r ---,--------.." I ' --'-----, -.-.---t-~-----

~

• '-' ~

:; (0 , (0 + -t-- 1 --------+------_\___------+ ---.----~---.----'" > • u • • •

0 f=is.r:=m====t;---r -t- t- -"----( . , (I

-C

'" 0

'" ~ ~

• " • ~ • u • " ~ • .. • ~ • .,

\ I ---- --- -~----------_t----+_-------- - ---

joJi \J\ ,,/' ---\ -- -----Itl --- \__ ____ ._I'~--+,c::::' --<-p- -~~=~"~=--~-",.,

-- lJ-W---------+--~-------\------" --

0) , I)

1. 0:-' , (I

- J.I) ,I)

-_$

~': ':.' , (o-t-----·-···-·--·-- j------------t- ----------± -----·-J-- i-'--------l ----_._-_._",_ .. - .. _._----""""'-+-.,,.----_. " ... _--_ .. _._-_ ... j.,,_ .. _._--_. ._._ ... _--" ._._._._,,-- _. !-,,_._-, 0) I) '-' "" E (, , 1 I) 1':1 . t ~: (I , ::: '-' I) , ;;;; S (I • :;:: I. ( • • ~: S <) , '.j " 0:-' • Lt = --

Time (Sec)

FIGURE C-8. GRAPH OF I ATE RAL DECELERATION, TEST 11-2

-• 0-... ~

" ~ ." u 0 ~ • > ~ u •

'" 0-e .... .... ~

0 • 0-0 U U 0

~ • " • ~ • ....

I.1j!,L.A3 O'-C UPAI'lT X HF"R C T I·! EL O CI T ' ....

3 (0 • (0 -.---t---~~----t-----J=.=~==-=~====l:::::::::==::t::-~:-----t---- =:1~~-·-----­//

.r-. ___ I,./ /

2 .... (. +-,7,, --+-7-r~-'-..,+-f--t---+---I----I-- - +----1-.-

1(0,0+---- -.---j----- ---t------ --.-+----.--1-- --- ----.-

(0 ,0)

/1 ----t~---f----_+----_+----_+------ ----1---

__ . __ . _______ :-::- ____ -+ ____ .. __ . --- --.--- --- ......... ---.---- ... _---1--....... _-(I, o)f, 0."<';: (0,10 (I,i S (1 , ;::0 ':o, ~s O, ::: '~ I " , '::: S (I,lf') ( I . .... S

Normalized Occupant Impact Velocity • (A V) - (17,0 fps) (88.2 fps) (91.4 fps)

16.4fps

FIGURE C-9. GRAPH OF LATERAL OCCUPANT IMPACT VELOCITY. TEST 11 -2

Time (Sec)

~

• 0-r.. ~

>-~ ~ u 0 ~ • :> ~ u •

<n 0-• '" H

~

C • 0-0 U U 0

~ • " • ~ • ..,

OCCUPAN T IMPA C T VELOCITY -----------------------.------------------------------------ ------. .- _. --,-, --------- --------- ------

Lfo) (0 ---- - ------ ---

- _..--'-- -:;:: t) "

;:: « 0

f----. /

~/ ..-/~

----- -------- --.--

,~ 1/ "''' l. (, , (, -----r -------- ------1------- ,--,--------- ----.-- ---------- -----I

'-' , (0

£!' ,,---- ---_.

- _._-- -0) , ,_, ') - -') , ,_, 5 -to , '- '-' - -OJ , l.!:"

(4 V)- -­Normalized Occupant Impact Velocity

- -'-' • .::. IJ

05_3 fps)

._-- --"-_._,

- -l ' , .::: S --,,- --:: o , .:' ')

(88.2 fps) (91.4 fps)

14.Bfps

FIGURE C-IO. GRAPH OF LATERAL OCCUPANT IMPACT VELOCITY, TEST 11-2

0) , L~,-, " • Y!:"

Time (Sec)

........ c

H '-"

.u 0 Q)

13 Q) u co

.--! p.

Ul Ill

.,..j

\0 ~

.u c:l CIS p. ;:) u u 0

.--! CIS ~ Q) .u CIS

.....:1

0:• •: •: LJ P1'1 t·l T r•T. S PLt1 •:E t·1Et·rJ' 1-------------------------·------ ... -------·----

1 :. t) ' t)

.1 ,,,·,

,r,.r·

--------·------- -----·----!--------·- ____ -;r:l""..:_~_ ... __ -+---·------,....,. ........

............ ,.,,. .... ..., .................

---+-------1-----+----- 7 •.• /·-4·

...... ,.,....

········-f' , •••.•••.••• -!

,,. , .................. .

.,. ............ . _,......,..:.::..._ __ ---

,J .,

...... ...r'/. ,,.t-r'

, ..•... ,., ..

- 1---------

~,-

tA A ,,.t••·•·•'"'"t'"'''...,. .. l'·"'

11--'l...,L._.u.._ _ __ -t------=""'" ......... . , .. _, ...... .1-'_,............ ............. l

t 't • I) ···• ---.......·-··•·~<~......,;:.._.: ·- --··---- -------~·· .. - · ·--·---···- ·-----~-+----- -----1~------ -

.................... ................................................ _,.. __ .,,_,,, '" ..................... _ .. ,_ .... ,, ........ ····· ............................................. ___ , ............................................. _ ... _ ......... """"' ......... ~-.... ·--· .~ ... --........................... " .................. -·-·~ .... - ""' ................. _ .. "'"' ..... . 0 1 1) (t 1) t 0 ~::: I) 1 :1, 1~1 1) o j !::: ( 1 1 :::. (I (I 1 ;::: s: 1::1 1 :::: 0 (t t ::,: !: I) I I,,, (I f 'j 1 ~~ &:;

~ IUUI!! 111!110• •lflllllj;jllloii ... IIMII!iM~I .... fii!IUitll! lllMitUIIIlll4111"tllll,.t+MI !IIIIIMI!Iilltlflllttl•lfl"ii!41Mitultllllt!M!Uilllltlf! t!lllil lfllllllllfiiflf .. lltl.lll•l\illlil .. lllllflli .. lflf1Wifltitllllt+t1WI41111Io1WUI IWIIIUIIIMI•IIIIIIIllt'IU14!fllltlfl.jflfllllfll.lftii!IMIIjjjiNU ... tlltiMw..llll IQ.IItJIUitll""""'"'*'""tttlolki iPWIIIoiMIUIIIIIIftiUit!tltloll tt•ltl"ltll~ltiMIIII't ... iltltlfllli•l_.lollllltlotllllilllllt.iAJ!•t ltlllllfflt+tlt.illltlolflt+.lllotilil"t't!JIIIIItlli!IIIIH"'IM.Iftllt'l•ttii!IIHIII IfMI.

Time (Sec)

FI GURE C- 11 . GRAPH OF LATERAL OCCUPANT DISPLACEMENT, TEST Il-2

'" D

~ ,

~ H ~

~ ~ , , , , , H 0-W ~

'" ~ C • 0-, U U o H • " • ~ :l

O '_C LJ PA t'~T I:O ISPL A CE t'1E N T

:I. 5 (t , (I ----- -

/.-' 10 (0 ,(0 -

l~ /~

/,L 1--'-

50.0

~~ .-----' 1M , . ..--"----

(I , ,)

---- - (-:-: to- I) , ::: 5: () , I) ':. (i , Co 5 (0 , 1 (I (t , 1 5 (I , ::: (I (, , ~ 5

Time (Sec)

FIGURE C-12. GRAPH OF LATERAL OCCUPANT DISPLACEMENT, TEST 11-2

--==

,-/ -

.// V

/ .....

---

- - -

(1 ,'-+ 0 .:' . If 5

APPENDIX D.

RELEVANT IDOT CORRESPONDENCE

61

~t. Iowa Department of Transoortation ~ c8='~)800Lincoln Way, Ames, Iowa 50010 515/2j9-1206

CiliO September 9, 1988 Ref. No. 521.5

Dr. Edward R. Post Civil Engineering Department University of Nebraska W348 Nebraska Hall Lincoln, Nebraska 68588-0531

Dear Dr. Post:

This memo is to advise you that, based on the tests run pre­viously, no further testing of the box-aluminum rail system (Task I) is required. You may proceed to remove that rail system and construct the concrete retrofit wall in prepara­tion for the testing required for Task II.

The Iowa Department of Transportation and FHWA have agreed that the vehicles used in Task II be as follows:

1800 5400 (pickup)

60 60

Impact Angle lQ~9.!~~~l

20 20

Also, construction details shall be as listed in my memo of August 31, 1988.

Inspection of the damage to the rail and curb section due to Task I testing indicated that all of the reinforcing bars for the curb were not placed in accordance with the plan. Although this apparent misplacement probably did not affect that testing it is imperative that the rebars be placed cor­rectly for Task II testing. I would request that this re­quirement be brought to the attention of the Contractor and Inspector.

WAL:dlt cc: R. Humphrey, G. Anderson

B. Brown, G. Sisson B. Brakke, FHWA

62

Sincerely,

6~ cf·~~ William A. Lundqulst Bridge Engineer