REAM Crash Barriers PDF

Sixth Malaysian Road Conference
16-18 August 2004
I The Future of Roads in National Economy I
Jointly Organised By
~ [i1 LEMBAGA
LEBUHRAYA
MINISTRY OF WORKS
• •
JABATAN KERJA RAYA

-.. MALAYSIA
~
MALAYSIAN HIGHWAY ROAD ENGINEERING
MALAYSIA MALAYSIA AUTHORITY ASSOCIATION OF MALAYSIA
Supported By
INSTITUTION OF INSTITUTION OF HIGHWAYS AND
ENGINEERS MALAYSIA TRANSPORTATION (MALAYSIAN BRANCH)
DRAFT
6MRC AUG.2004
1.0 INTRODUCTION
2.0 GENERAL DESIGN CONSIDERATIONS
2.1 AIM
2.2 BARRIER TYPES
2.2.1 Rigid Barriers
2.2.2 Semi-Rigid Barriers
2.2.3 Flexible Barriers
2.3 PERFORMANCE REQUIREMENTS
2.4 CLEAR ZONE CONCEPT
2.4.1 Primary Considerations
2.5 SAFETY BARRIERS WARRANTS
2.5.1 Embankment Safety Barriers
2.5.2 Safety Barrier at Fixed Objects
2.5.3 Median Safety Barrier
3.0 SAFETY BARRIER SELECTION GUIDELINES & LAYOUT
3.1 SELECTION GUIDELINES
3.1.1 Barrier Performance Capability
3.1.2 Barrier Deflection Characteristics
3.1.3 Site Conditions
3.1.4 Compatibility
3.1.5 Life Cycle Costs
3.1.6 Maintenance
3.1.7 Aesthetic and Environmental Considerations
3.1.8 Field Experience
3.2 SAFETY BARRIERS LOCATION AND LAYOUT
3.2.1 Roadside Safety Barrier Systems Elements
3.2.2 Layouts and Location
3.2.3 Median Safety Barriers
3.3 OTHER CONSIDERATIONS
3.3.1 Combination of Safety Barrier Systems
4.0 CONCRETE BARRIERS
4.1 INTRODUCTION
4.2 CONCRETE BARRIERS DESCRIPTION AND BEHAVIOR
4.2.1 Design Parameters of Multi Slopes Barriers
4.3 CONCRETE BARRIERS SELECTION
4.4 RECOMMENDATION
5.0 W-BEAM GUARDRAIL
5.1 INTRODUCTION
5.1.1 General
5.1.2 Safety Performance of W-Beam Guardrail
5.2 BLOCKED-OUT STEEL W-BEAM GUARDRAIL
5.2.1 Description and Behavior under Impact
5.2.2 Guardrail Height
5.2.3 Location on Road Cross-section
5.2.4 Lateral Offset
5.3 INSTALLATION
5.3.1 Installation Length
5.3.2 Transitions to Rigid Objects
(Transition to Bridge Railings)
5.3.3 Installation of W-Beam Guardrail in Vicinity of Concrete
Drains
DRAFT
6MRC AUG.2004
5.4 TERMINAL SECTIONS
5.4.1 Flared Terminals
5.4.2 Ramped Terminals
5.4.3 Straight Extensions
5.4.4 Terminals Treatment
5.4.5 Breakaway Terminals
5.5 MODIFIED BLOCK OUT STEEL THRIE BEAM
5.5.1 On Shoulders
5.5.2 On Median
5.6 RECOMMENDATION
5.7 APPENDIX
5.7.1 Appendix 5A
6.0 WIRE ROPE SAFETY FENCE
6.1 INTRODUCTION
6.2 GENERAL DESCRIPTION
6.3 WIRE ROPE SAFETY FENCE COMPONENTS
6.4 CONSIDERATION FOR WIRE ROPE SAFETY BARRIER
INSTALLATION
6.5 LOCATIONS FOR INSTALLATION OF WIRE ROPE SAFETY
BARRIER
6.6 MAINTENANCE AND REPAIR
6.7 RECOMMENDATION
6.8 APPENDIX
6.8.1 Appendix 6A
6.8.2 Appendix 6B
6.8.3 Appendix 6C
6.8.4 Appendix 6D
7.0 REFERENCES
DRAFT
6MRC AUG.2004
1.0 INTRODUCTION
Longitudinal traffic safety barriers are highway features designed primarily to reduce
the severity of run-off-road accidents, prevent out-of-control vehicles from crossing
the median, and decelerate errant vehicles. These features include guardrail, concrete
barrier and wire rope fence.
Over the years, standards for traffic safety barriers have evolved and continue to
change in response to changing technology, research findings, and changes in the
design and speed of vehicles. Consequently, many existing traffic safety barriers need
to be reviewed to comply with the latest design standards. This new guideline. is
intended to update the Arahan Teknik (Jalan) 1/85 "Manual on Design Guidelines of
Longitudinal Traffic Barrier" (Pindaan 1/89)
This new Guideline will provide clearer design, selection consideration and
installation details for the 3 different longitudinal traffic safety barriers namely:
a) Concrete Barrier (Chapter-4)

b) W-Beam Guardrail (Chapter-5)
c) Wire Rope Safety Fence (Chapter-6)
DRAFT
6MRC AUG.2004
2.0 GENERAL DESIGN CONSIDERATIONS
2.1 AIM
Longitudinal traffic safety barrier is installed to reduce the severity of run-off-road

accidents. This is accomplished by redirecting a vehicle away from embankment
slopes or fixed objects and dissipating the energy of the errant vehicle. However,
safety barrier will reduce accident severity only for those conditions where striking
the safety barrier is less severe than going down an embankment or striking a fixed
object. Safety barrier should only be installed where it is clear that accident severity
will be reduced, or there is a history of run-off-rqad accidents at this location.
Consideration should first be given to eliminating or minimizing conditions requiring

safety barrier. This can be done by flattening embankment slopes and by determining
alternative locations and designs of roadside appurtenances.
Special consideration should be given to eliminating or relocating solitary fixed

objects that cannot be made breakaway or yielding. The cost of eliminating the object
may be offset by savings from reduced collision frequency and reduced maintenance.
Safety barrier required to provide protection at such objects increases exposure and
may result in an increase in the number of accidents.
Safety barrier is not intended to and should not be used as a barricade or to prevent
indiscriminate use of otherwise clear portions of the roadside.
2.2 BARRIER TYPES
2.2.1 Rigid Barriers
It refers to longitudinal safety barrier which does not deflect upon impact. The basic
function of rigid barrier is to redirect a vehicle that hits it. During collisions, energy is
dissipated by raising and lowering the vehicle and by deformation of the vehicle sheet
metal. The energy management feature of rigid barriers is able to redirect the
colliding vehicle stably without any rolling movement.
2
DRAFT
6MRC AUG2004
2.2.2 Semi-Rigid Barriers
It is used where small to moderate deflection is acceptable (maximum deflection of

1.2m) and can generally be categorized into two (2) groups:
a) Strong Beam I Weak Post
The posts near the point of impact are purposely designed to break away so
that the force of impact is distributed by beam action to a relatively larger
number of posts. Attributes of this system are
• Barrier performance is independent of impact point at or between posts
and of soil properties, and
• Vehicle snagging on a post is virtually eliminated.
b) Strong Beam I Strong Post
The posts near the point of impact are purposely designed to only deflect moderately
and the force of impact is distributed by beam action to a smaller number of posts.
This is to be considered when:
• Minimal deflection is required.
• Transitioning to rigid objects such as bridge parapets.
2.2.3 Flexible Barriers
It is a longitudinal safety barrier which relies on large dynamic deflection by utilizing

the energy management principle. It absorbs the dynamic impacting kinetic energy
through the posts, anchors and the pre-tensioned wire ropes whereby the posts are
designed to collapse progressively on impact. It guides the collided vehicle forward
away from the line of traffic as it deflects, rather than deflected it back into the flow
of traffic, with potentially lethal consequences. The post in conjunction with the wire
ropes is designed to prevent crossovers. Flexible Barriers keep vehicles damage to a
minimum and reduce the risk of serious personal injury
3
DRAFT
6MRC AUG.2004
2.3 PERFORMANCE REQUIREMENTS
NCHRP (National Cooperative Highway Research Program) Report 350 is a

guideline for testing both permanent and temporary road safety features and it
recommends performance evaluation criteria to assess the test results. The objective
of the testing is to determine the manner in which a road safety feature performs
during a vehicle crash situation, for typical site and traffic conditions, Tb.er..e ...are.-Sjx
test levels as shown in Table 2.1 below, each being defined by impact conditions, ie.
speed, angle of approach, mass and vehicle type.
Ve.bi!=les·& ImpacfApgl~v Test Speed

a) 820kg Car (20°) 50km/hr
b) 2000kg pickup truck (25°)
TL-2 a) 820kg Car (20°) 70km/hr
TL-3 a) 820kg Car (20°) 100km/hr
TL-4 a) 820kg Car (20°) 100kmlhr
b) 2000kg pickup truck (25°) 100km/hr
c) 8000kg single unit truck (15°) 80kmJhr
TL-5 a) 820kg Car (20°) 100km/hr
c) 36000kg tractor/van trailer (15°) 80km/hr
TL-6 a) 820kg Car (20°) 100km/hr
c) 36000kg tractor/tank trailer (15°) 80kmJhr
Table 2.1: 6 Tests Levels (TL) for longitudinal barriers established in
NCHRP Report 350 (Source: FHWA)
It should also be noted that, although different types of barriers have road safety
features that meet a given test level, they would generally have different performance
characteristics. The minimum performance level for road safety barriers (roadside &
median) is NCHRP 350 Test Level 3 (TL-3) for major roads (R4 & U4 geometrics
standard and above) or expressway. Higher performance level barriers will, however,
be required in many situations.
4
DRAFT
6MRC AUG.2004
2.4 CLEAR ZONE CONCEPT
An area clear of fixed objects adjacent to the roadway is desirable to provide a

recovery zone for vehicles that have left the traveled way. Studies have indicated that
on high-speed highways, a clear width of 9 m from the edge of the traveled way
permits about 80 percent of the vehicles leaving the roadway out of control to recover.
On most conventional highways, a 9 m clear zone distance may be difficult to justify

for engineering, environmental or economic reasons. For these reasons, a minimum,
traversable clear recovery area of 6 m on conventional highways is advised. The
designer must keep in mind that site-specific conditions such as volume, speed,
alignment, side slope, weather, adjacent development, and environmental conditions
should be evaluated when determining the clear recovery zone. Generally, if a
potentially hazardous features lies within the adopted clear zone for a particular road
segment, there exists an increasing probability of a collision as the lateral offset from
the running lanes to the feature is reduced. Figure 2.1 depicts the relationship between
vehicle speed and the probability of an errant vehicle travelling a particular lateral
distance from the traveled way.
5
DRAFT
6MRC AUG.2004
100
90
80
70
60
"
~
~ 50
-'
m
-<{
aJ
0
a:: 40
IL
30
20
10
oL-L-----.L----L---l~S~g@~~~~~~!!I..._J..._l~
o 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 1B 20 22 24 25 28 30 32
LATERAL OFFSET (METERS)
Figure 2.1: Probability Encroachment Curve
(Source: Road Planning and Design Manual, Australia)
Figure 2.2 below illustrates the roadside 'Clear-Zone' Requirements of Vicroads

(1995). Obstacles located in the clear recovery zone should be removed, relocated,
made breakaway, or shielded by safety barrier or other means.
6
DRAFT
6MRC AUG.2004
One Wqy MOT
(Appf"OOCl\ Valum.)
Clear ZOr'\8 Width e-/do,)
10 , - - - - - , - - - - - - - - - - , - - - - - , - - - - - - - - - , - - - - - , - - - - - - , - - - - , - - - - - , - - - - - , - - - - - - ,
~-'----------'-------'--------'------j.000
8 .
r.--'----------'---,------,-------I '000
....-'---'---------'-----.;------1 2000
~c
":if,.
&]
'::~
ro~ •..........: :..........•........ : / /
i
!
50 60 7<J ao so 100 110 1'0

as", f'o<o.ntil. sp.... lkm/h)
Clear Zone Width on Straights
o 100 200 300 400 ~oo 600 700 600 900 \ COO 1\00
Radius
Clear Zone Width on Curve = Clear Zone Width on Straights x Fc
Figure 2.2: The roadside 'Clear-Zone' Requirements
(Source: Vicroads 1995)
7
DRAFT
6MRC AUG.2004
2.4.1 Primary Considerations
• Remove / Relocate the Obstacle
There are several locations where a fixed object can be relocated from the clear
recovery zone. By order of preference, they are:
a) Rerriove it if practicable.
b) Move it to a location where it is unlikely to be hit, such as up a slope or behind a
safety barrier or wall that is required for other reasons.
c) Relocate it far enough from the traveled way to minimize its chances of being
struck. Non-traversable ditches, drainage structures, columns, utility poles, and
overhead sign structures may be handled by this method.
d) Relocate an obstacle in the median or gore to a location beyond the left shoulder,
thereby reducing the risk of exposure to at least one direction of travel.
• Make the Obstacle Breakaway
If fixed objects such as light standards and ground-mounted sign supports cannot be
moved out of the clear recovery zone, they should be considered for breakaway
treatment. Other features in the vicinity should not impede the function of the
breakaway device or adversely influence the vehicle response.
All light standards located where they can be struck by a vehicle should have a slip
base, except where pedestrians might be struck by the falling standard or it could
conflict with traffic.
• Shield the Obstacle
If it is not practical to eliminate, relocate, or make a fixed object break away, then the
object should be shielded. All the systems available to shield fixed objects are also
fixed objects. They do not prevent an accident but are intended to reduce the severity
of the accident. Longitudinal safety barriers such as wire rope, W-beam guardrail,
median barrier, and bridge railing are designed to redirect a vehicle away from its
errant path. These barriers must be tested for structural integrity and occupant risk.
b -.. .;;",, ......-.l

DRAFT
6MRC AUG.2004
2.5 SAFETY BARRIERS WARRANTS
2.5.1 Embankment Safety Barriers
The primary contributors to the severity of over-embankment accidents are the height
and slope of the embankment or side hill. Safety barrier is a fixed object and should
be installed only at locations where going off the embankment would be more severe
than hitting the safety barrier (Figure2.3) and there has been a history of over
embankment accidents.
1 :1 r-------,
SAFETY BARRIER
WARRANTED
~ 1: 1.5
I ..
~
>
w 1:2
[L
0
---1
(f)
1:3 I - - - - - t - - -
SAFETY BARR I ER~~~~I!!!II._~
1:4 MAY NOT BE WARRANTED
o 3 6 9 12 15
EMBANKMENT HEIGHT (Meters)
Figure 2.3: Equal Severity Curve
(Source: Caltrans)
Figure 2.4 outlines the recommended process for assessmg the treatment for
embankment:
9
DRAFT
6MRC AUG.2004
No
No
Embankment is
low risk
Is the
roadside environment Yes
consistently hazardous >------------------------,
Yes
Does Does
em bankmenl post embankment have
No Yes
a greater risk than roadside adverse crash history
harrier in.tallalio
Yes
Prioritise against compeling projects according to quantitative and qualitative criteria
Figure 2.4: Embankment Flow Chart
(Source: Roadside Design Guide, RTA New South Wales, Australia)
10
DRAFT
6MRC AUG.2004
2.5.2 Safety Barrier at Fixed Objects
Longitudinal traffic safety barrier should be considered at all fixed objects that are
accessible to traffic and within the clear recovery zone. Objects with slip-bases or
breakaway features and those that yield because of their small size are not considered
fixed objects for this application. Nontraversable and fixed objects which normally
warrant shielding are listed below:
a. Rough rock cuts
b. Large boulders
c. Permanent bodies of water with depth of> 600 mm
d. Line of large trees (matured diameter> 200 mm)
e. Bridge piers and abutment at underpasses
f. Retaining walls and culvert headwalls
g. Culvert end or wing walls forming abrupt drops greater than
about 1.0m in height
h. Gap between twin bridges
1. Narrowing of roadway (loss of shoulder) over structure
J. Street lighting poles
k. Traffic sign poles in particular gantry signs or butterfly signs
1. Railway tracks
11
DRAFT
6MRC AUG.2004
Figure 2.5 outlines the recommended process for assessing the treatment of fixed
object hazards.
No Hazard is
low risk
c
0
-0 .~ No
~
:r: c
t;:;
~
~
No
Yes
Evaluation of possible
treatments
Select next best
treatment
Is the most economical treatment acceptable with regard to

engineering and environmental issues? No
Yes
D Prioritise against competing projects

according to quantitative and qualitative criteria
Figure 2.5: Fixed Object Flow Chart
12
DRAFT
6MRC AUG.2004
2.5.3 Median Safety Barrier
Median safety barrier should ideally function to:

1) Reduce the risk of an out-of-control vehicle crossing the median and colliding
with opposing traffic.
2) Reduce the risk of deflection back into the traffic stream of a vehicle colliding
with the barrier.
3) Decelerate the errant vehicle within tolerable limits.
4) Improve safety through access limitations.
Figure 2.6 suggests warrants for median barriers on high speed, controlled access
roadways which have relative flat, traversable medians.
13
DRAFT
6MRC AUG.2004
24.0 ,..--~--__r-------r------r---------,-------,---~----,
....
... .....
40 60 80 100
AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC (Thousands)
Barriers in these cases should c=J Barrier Warranted

be considered only if there is an
unusually high number or rote of
cross-median accidents.
Figure 2.6: Median Barrier Study Warrants

(Source: Caltrans)
While median safety barriers are capable of preventing nearly all of the cross-median
accidents, their installation will result in fixed-object accidents that might not
otherwise occur. Figure 2.7 outlines the recommended process for assessing the need
for median safety barrier installation.
14
DRAFT
6MRC AUG.2004
Is the
road high speed Median barrier
and divided? not recommended
Yes No
Is the road
cross median crash
rate above the threshold?
Yes
Is barrier installation acceptable with regard to

engineering and environmental issues? No
Yes
Prioritise against competing projects according
to quantitative and qualitative criteria
Figure 2.7: Median Safety Barrier Flow Chart (Source: Roadside Design Guide,
RTA New South Wales, Australia)
15
DRAFT
6MRC AUG.2004
3.0 SAFETY BARRIER SELECTION GUIDELINES & LAYOUT
3.1 SELECTION GUIDELINES
Once it has been decided that a barrier is warranted, a specific barrier type must be
selected. Although this selection process is complicated by a number of variables and
the lack of objective criteria, there are some general guidelines that can be followed.
The most desirable system is usually one that offers the required degree of shielding
at the lowest total cost. Table 3.1 summarizes the factors that should be considered
before making a final selection. Each of these factors is described in more detail in
the following subsections.
TABLE 3.1: Selection Criteria for Roadside Barriers (Source: AASHTO)
Criteria Comments
1. Performance barrier must be structurally able to contain and redirect design
Capability vehicle.
2. Deflection expected deflection of barrier should not exceed available room
to deflect.
3. Site conditions slope approaching the barrier, and distance from traveled way,
may preclude use of some barrier types.
4. Compatibility barrier must be compatible with planned end anchor and capable
of transition to other barrier systems (such as bridge railing).
5. Cost standard barrier systems are relatively consistent in cost, but
high-performance railings can cost significantly more.
6. Maintenance
a. routine few systems require a significant amount of routine maintenance.
b. collision generally, flexible or semi-rigid systems require significantly
more maintenance after a collision than rigid or high-
performance railings.
c. materials the fewer different systems used, the fewer
storage inventory/items/storage space required.
d. simplicity simpler designs, besides costing less, are more likely to be
reconstructed properly by field personnel.
7. Aesthetics occasionally, barrier aesthetics is an important consideration in
its selection.
8. Field the performance and maintenance requirements of existing
Experience systems should be monitored to identify problems that could be
lessened or eliminated by using a different barrier type.
16
DRA1=T
6MRC AUG.2004
3.1.1 Barrier Performance Capability
The first decision to be made when selecting an appropriate traffic barrier concerns
the level of performance required. Traditionally, most barriers have been developed
and tested for passenger cars, and offer marginal protection when struck by heavier
vehicles such as trucks and buses at high speeds and large angles of impact.
Therefore, if passenger vehicles are the main concern, a standard railing which
satisfies other concerns will normally be selected. However, locations with poor
geometrics, high traffic volumes and/or speeds and a significant volume of heavy
truck traffic may warrant a higher performance level or stronger railing system. This
is especially true if barrier penetration by a vehicle is likely to have serious
consequences. Similarly, for low volume, low speed roadways, a standard barrier may
not be cost-effective. At locations like these, a less expensive system may adequately
contain the likely range of expected vehicle impacts. Any design used should indicate
satisfactory performance, either through crash testing or favourable accident
experience within the range of expected conditions. The following factors are often
considered in reaching a decision on barrier capacity:
a) High percentage of heavy vehicles.
b) Adverse geometrics (horizontal curvature coincides with steep down grade).
c) Serious consequences if a vehicle penetrated, or rolled over, the barrier.
3.1.2 Barrier Deflection Characteristics
Once the desired performance level or barrier capability has been determined, site
characteristics may dictate the type of barrier to install. If the distance between the
barrier and the shielded object or terrain feature is relatively large, a barrier which
deflects upon impact, thereby imposing lower impact forces on the vehicle and its
occupants, may be the best choice. If the hazard is immediately adjacent to the barrier,
a semi-rigid or rigid railing system may be the only choice available. Most semi-rigid
systems can be strengthened locally by adding additional posts or by reinforcing the
rail element to shield isolated fixed objects located near the rail. Table 3.2 tabulates
the design deflection for longitudinal barriers:
17
DRAFT
6MRC AUG.2004
Characteristic! Type Application Post spacing D~nf'Clion Mountine ht'i2hl Te-sl Ltvtl
Flexible Longitudinal Varies wilh Varies with type of barrier Varies with type of TL-3
roadside type of barrier (typically 1.7 to 3 4m for a 2000 kg barrier
barrier (typically 2 4 vehicle@IOOkmlh and 25" approach (lOp is typically set
to 5.0m) angle - but check with manufacturer) 675 to 77001rTI above
ground level)
Wire RODe Roadside/median barriers

Semi Longitudinal 2000mm Approximately I Om (2000kg vehicle 71 Omm to lOP of rail TL-3
rigid roadside @IOOkmlh and 25" approach angle (2m post
barrier but check with manufacturer) spacing)
4000mm Approximately 1 2m TL-2

(401 post
spacing)
W·beam roadside barrier
Semi·
Longiludinal 2000mm Approximately 600mm (2000 kg 805mm to top of rail TL-3
rigid roadside vehicle@IOOkm/h and 250,) approach
barrier angle - but check with manufacturer
Thrie-beam roadside bamer

Semi Longitudinal 2000mm Approximately 900mm (9000kg 86Smm to top of rail TL-4
rigid roadside vehicle, 9Okmlh, 15 0 approach angle
barrier - but check with manufacturer)
Modified Thrie-beam roadside barrier

Semi Longitudinal 2000mm Approximately 600mm (2000kg 710mm to top of rail TL-J
~J
rigid median vehicle, 100kmlh. 25() approach angle
barrier - bUI check with manufaclurer)
IT
W-beam median barrier
Semi
Longitudinal 2000mm Approximately 500mm (2000kg 865mm 10 lOp of rail TL-4
~J
rigid median vehicle, @ l00km/hand 25<1 approach
barrier angle - but check with manufacturer)
NOTE: Testing has shown that a

modified thrie-beam barrier can
safely redirect an 18.000 kg vehicle
---cr
Modified Thrie-beam median barrier
@80 kmlh and 15" approach.
Rigid Longitudinal N/A Negligible if appropriately embedded 820 and I )OOmm TL-4/ TL-5
---'-, roadside into the ground.
barrier If height is reduced to
o less than 72Smm by
o
~ pavement overlays
vchides may roll over
\~
the barrier.
F-shape concrete roadside barrier
Rigid
Longitudinal N/A Negligible if appropriately embedded 820 and 11 OOmm TL-4/ TL-5
median into the ground
barrier Barrier heights less
than 72Smm are
undesirable - see note
above
F-shaoe con<:rete median barrier
Table 3.2: Design Deflections for Longitudinal Barriers

(Source: Transit New Zealand)
18
DRAFT
6MRC AUG.2004
a) Occupant Risk
Generally vehicle accelerations and occupant impact velocities are higher for rigid
and semi rigid safety barriers as compared to flexible safety barrier. Table 3.3 shows
the severity indices for all vehicles at varying speeds.
Roadside Features Design Speeds (km/h)

<70 80-90 > 100
Safety Barrier:
Wire Rope (4 wire ropes) 1.5 2.0 2.5
W Beam (04) 2.0 2.5 3.0
Thrie Beam 2.0 2.5 3.0
Type F (concrete barrier) 2.0 2.5 3.5
Drain & Kerbs:
Unlined Table Drain 2.0 2.5 3.0
Barrier Kerb 2.0 2.5 3.5
Mountable Kerb 0.5 1.0 2.0
Non Fran~ible Objects:
Bridge Piers, Bridge End Posts 5.0 6.0 8.0
End of Retaining Wall 5.0 6.0 8.0
Post Poles & Trees:
200dia. 3.5 4.5 5.5
300 dia. 4.0 5.0 7.0
Crash Attenuators, Breakaway 2.5 3.0 3.5
terminals Treatments
Embankments
1: 1.5 slope, height (1.0m - 2.5m) 2.0-5.0 2.5-6.0 3.0-7.0
1:2.0 slope, height (2.0m - 4.0m) 2.0-5.0 2.5-6.0 3.0-7.0
1:3.0 slope, height (4.5m - 7.5m) 2.0-5.0 2.5-6.0 3.0-7.0
1:4.0 slope, height (l O.Om - 14.0m) 1.5-4.0 2.0-5.5 2.5-7.0
1:5.0 slope, height (any) 1.0 1.5 2.0
1: 10.0 slope, height (any) 0.5 1.0 1.5
Near Vertical Drop
6 -10m 7.0-9.5 7.0-9.5 8.0-9.5
>IOm 10 10 10
Vertical Drops
Pavement Excavation up to 0.5m 3.0 3.5 4.0
Vehicle
Impact oncoming vehicle 7.5 7.5 8.0
Impact stationary vehicle 3.0 3.5 4.0
Table 3.3: Severity Indices for all Vehicles at Varying Speeds

19
DRAFT
6MRC AUG.2004
The relationship between Severity Index and the type of injury is shown in Table 3.4
below:
SI Damage Only Minor Injury Medical Hospitali Fatal (%)

Accident (%) (%) Treatment (%) sation (%)
0 0 0 0 0 0
0.5 100 0 0 0 0
1 90.4 7.3 2.3 0 0
2 71 22 7 0 0
3 43 34 21 1 1
4 30 30 32 5 3
5 15 22 45 10 8
6 7 16 39 20 18
7 2 10 28 30 30
8 0 4 19 27 50
9 0 0 7 18 75
10 0 0 0 0 100
Table 3.4: Severity Index Summary Table
(Source: Road Planning and Design Manual, Australia)
3.1.3 Site Conditions
The choice of barrier type will often be influenced by conditions at the site. The
distance from the edge of traveled way, if too great, may preclude the use of a rigid
barrier. If the barrier is to be placed on a slope steeper than about 10: 1, a flexible type
should be used. Narrow grade widths, with corresponding narrow shoulders, may
result in reduced post restraint and the need for deeper embedment, a closer post
spacing, or soil plates.
In wide medians where the slopes are steeper than 1OH: 1V but not steeper than
6H: 1V, cable barrier placed near the center of the median is preferred. Placement of
beam guardrail requires that the barrier be placed at least 3.6m from the slope break as
20
DRAFT
6MRC AUG.2004
is shown on Figure 3.1. Do not use concrete barrier at locations where the foreslope
into the face of the barrier is steeper than 10H: 1V.
No barrier except wire rope

safety barrier in this area
Shoulder
3.6m - - ,
SloPes st I
but nots:J'er than 10H'
Per than 6H: 1~v
I
Figure 3.1: Barrier Location on Slopes
(Source: Washington State Department of Transportation)
3.1.4 Compatibility
As a general practice, most highway agencies use only a few different barrier systems
on new construction and on reconstruction. The advantages of this are relatively
obvious: the systems in use have been proven effective over the years, construction
and maintenance personnel are familiar with the systems, parts and inventory
requirements are simplified when only a few different types of barrier are routinely
used, and end treatments/transition sections for normal installations can also be
standardized. The only time a non-standard or special barrier design need be
considered is when site characteristics or performance requirements cannot be
satisfied with a standard railing.
21
DRAFT
6MRC AUG.2004
3.1.5 Life Cycle Costs
Initial costs and future maintenance costs of alternate barrier systems may weigh
heavily in the final selection process. Normally, the initial cost of a system increases
as its strength increases, but maintenance costs decrease. Conversely, a system having
a relatively low installation cost usually requires significantly more maintenance
effort following impacts.
3.1.6 Maintenance
Maintenance factors can be grouped into one of three categories: routine maintenance,
collision maintenance, and material and storage requirements.
a) Routine Maintenance
Routine maintenance costs are usually not appreciably different for any of the
operational barrier systems. Although some cleaning and painting is occasionally
done, use of preservative-treated wood posts and galvanized steel posts and rail
components have nearly eliminated the need for this activity. Some systems may
interfere more with right-of-way mowing and vegetation control, but no one system
appears to create significantly more problems in this area than any of the others.
b) Collision Maintenance
Collision maintenance includes any and all repairs or adjustments to barriers that are
necessitated by vehicle impacts. These costs should play an important role in the
selection of a barrier system since the majority of maintenance costs are usually due
to collision repairs.
22
DRAFT
6MRC AUG.2004
The number of impacts that will occur along a particular installation depends upon a
number of factors including traffic speed and volume, roadway alignment, and the
distance between the edge of the traveled way and the barrier itself. The extent of
barrier damage for any specific impact depends upon the strength of the railing
system. Collision maintenance costs may become an overriding consideration in areas
where traffic volumes are extremely high and collisions with the barrier are frequent.
This is almost always the case along urban freeways, where railing repair creates
hazardous conditions for both the repair crew and for motorists using the roadway.
For this reason, a rigid traffic barrier such as the concrete safety shape is often the
barrier of choice at such locations.
A consideration in collision maintenance for post and rail systems is the ability of the
rail element and possibly the posts to be re-used after a hit. Savings may be realized if
the rail can be straightened. In some cases, of course, the rail will be damaged beyond
repair in which case salvage value may be a consideration.
c) Material and Storage Requirements
Before selecting a barrier system, an effort should be made to determine the future
availability of the materials needed for repairs and their storage requirements. The
need for stocking spare parts increases as the number of required parts increases.
Thus, there are obvious advantages to using only a few barrier systems whose
component parts are standardized, easy to stockpile, and readily available.
d) Simplicity of Barrier Design
The simpler the railing system is, the easier it is to repair properly. Thus, the degree of
expertise or the level of working knowledge of the system by the repair crew should
be considered when selecting a barrier. An operational system that is improperly
installed or maintained is only partially effective at best.
23
DRAFT
6MRC AUG.2004
3.1.7 Aesthetic and Environmental Considerations
Aesthetic concerns are not usually a significant factor in the selection of a barrier
except in environmentally sensitive locations such as recreational areas or parks. In
these instances, a natural-looking barrier that blends with its surroundings is often
selected. In such cases, it is important that the systems used be crashworthy as well as
visually acceptable to the highway agency.
Environmental factors may be important to consider in the selection process. Certain

types of railings may deteriorate rapidly in highly-corrosive urban/industrial
environments. In some cases, solid barriers may restrict sight distances of motorists
entering the highway from a side road or intersection, or may block a motorist's view
of a particularly scenic panorama.
3.1.8 Field Experience
There is no substitute for documented proof of a barrier's field performance. If a

particular barrier system is working satisfactorily and does not require an
extraordinary amount of maintenance, there is little reason to install a barrier for
which these characteristics are not conclusively known. If site conditions warrant a
non-standard installation, the highway agency which developed and/or used the new
system should be contacted for specific information on the system and on its
performance.
It is particularly important that impact performance and repair cost data be maintained
by appropriate highway agency personnel and that the information be made available
to design and construction engineers in charged with selecting and installing traffic
barriers.
24
DRAFT
6MRC AUG.2004
3.2 SAFETY BARRIERS LOCATION AND LAYOUT
3.2.1 Roadside Safety Barrier Systems Elements
The various elements that make up a typical longitudinal roadside barrier system are
illustrated in Figure 3.2. Median barrier systems are virtually identical but the
elements are designed to resist impacts from either side. The functions of the various
barrier elements are:
a) Terminal, or end Treatment

• To safely accommodate end impacts and allow development of the
structural capacity of the barrier.
b) Length of Need (LON)
• The total length of standard barrier and transition section needed to shield
the area concern
c) Standard Section
• The length of standard design barrier
d) Transition
• The length of barrier between two different barrier types, or between a
barrier and bridge rail or a rigid object such as bridge pier, which is
designed to provide gradual change in stiffness that will prevent vehicle
pocketing or snagging.
25
DRAFT
6MRC AUG.2004
UP STREAM I LENGTH OF NEED
~!~·lf-·-~{-~-~~O-~--T-","-=.'I
BRIDGE RAIL I LENGTH OF NEED
l:ffiA.,m:f~~~:- M I DOVI.N STREAM

TERMINAL
OR END
TREATMENT
~ R 0 ~ . I i H;:i iL-_s--_ll- P
~-B~Ru..--L8L8o.... .....-:8wR..L-fLKB-8-J...-"';"
Figure 3.2: Longitudinal Roadside Safety Barrier System Elements
3.2.2 Layouts and Location
The factors that must be considered in the location and layout of safety barriers are as
follow:
a) Offset from Edge of Traffic Lane
Drivers tend to react adversely to objects placed too close to the edge of a traffic lane
by slowing unnecessarily or steering away. The distance from the adjacent traffic lane
beyond which roadside features do not cause such a reaction is termed as the shy line
offset. The shy line offsets shown in Table 3.5 below should be provided wherever
possible.
Design Or 85 ln Shy Line Offset - Ls(m)
Percentile Speed (km/h)
Nearside (Left) Offside (Right)
]
70 ~ 1.5 1.0
80 2.0 1.0
90 2.5 1.5
~ 100 3.0 2.0
* The absolute minimum shy line offset of a roadside barrier from edge of traffic lane
is Lam
Table 3.5: Recommended Shy Line Offsets
26
DRAFT
6MRC AUG.2004
b) Deflection Requirements
The expected deflection of a barrier must not exceed the space available for it to
freely deflect. Figure 3.3 illustrates two situations where the barrier deflection
distance is important and must be considered
Barrier Deflection
Requirement
Deflection Requirements for Flexible and Semi-rigid Barriers
600 mm (Minimum)
BarrilCl .I. "'\.:lCment on Fill Embankment
Figure 3.3: Two Situations where the Barrier Deflection Distance is Important
27
DRAFT
6MRC AUG.2004
c) Any Terrain Effects
Barriers perfonn best when impacted by vehicle with all of its wheels on the ground,
and the suspension components are in their nonnal position.
• Kerbs
Kerbs should not be located in front of barriers as errant vehicle can vault
over, or break through the barrier (unless the system is specifically

designed and tested).
• Side slopes
Safe barriers perfonn most effectively when installed on slopes of S 1: 1O.
• Shoulder
To help ensure vehicle stability the shoulder should be extended to the face
of safety barrier. When a barrier is located S 600mm from the edge of a
traffic lane the full width of shoulder surface should be sealed or paved.
d) Flare Rate
l
A flare rate is nonnally used to adjust the distance of a safety barrier from the edge of
the carriageway. Flared barriers will minimise driver reaction to an obstacle close to
the road. Table 3.6 shows the recommended flare rates at various design / operating
speed.
Design/Operating Flare Rate
Speed Beyond Shy Line
Inside Shy Line
(kmh) Rigid Non-rigid
~60 1: 18 1:12 1: 10
70 1:21 1: 14 1: 11
80 1:24 1: 16 1:12
90 1:26 1: 18 1: 14
~ 100 1:30 1:20 1: 15
Table 3.6: Recommended Flare Rates

28
DRAFT
6MRC AUG.2004
e) Length of Need
Installation should be extended upstream from the warranted limits to prevent vehicle
access behind the barrier system. It is not necessary to extend the installation
downstream past the hazard on highways with one way traffic. For highways with two
way undivided traffic, the installation should extend downstream.
A method to establish the length-of-need of the installation is based on the run out
distance LR (refer Table 3.7). The length-of-need is calculated by:
A
L N = (1 - -
B) X LR
where LN = Length-of-need
A = Distance of barrier from the edge of pavement
B = Distance of object from edge of pavement
LR = Runout length
Tenninallengths are added to the length-of-need as in Figure 3.4.
_ _ • _ _ • _ _~Rt'\NT ~'--'-'--'--. - ----r-
I~TERMNAL...,.....---· ----=-0---.
lD
~
Ii
o!
RUNOUT, LR
Figure 3.4: Determination of Installation Length
29
DRAFT
6MRC AUG.2004
RUN-OUT LENGTH, LR
Speed RUN-OUT
(kmJh) (m)
60 50-60
80 80-90
100 100-120
2110 120
Table 3.7: Recommended Run-out Length, L R
(Source: NAASRA)
Short sections of barrier system should be avoided as they are ineffective and often
introduce new hazards instead. As isolated length of barrier system on an 3
embankment should not be less than 30 meters. For high speed facilities, a minimum
of 75 meters is desirable. Short length of barrier system is only useful as a warning of a
the presence of obstruction or hazard but is inadequate as a physical protection

A
• Graphical Method for Determining the Length of Need b
The length of need can be found by scaling details directly from road
layout plans as shown in Figure 3.5 below:
IT
T
al
(~
h
LA = Distance from edge of traffic lane to the back of hazard

Lc = Clear Zone Width
•
Figure 3.5: Length of Need for a Barrier Located on the outside of a Horizontal
Curve (Source: Transit New Zealand)
•
•
30
DRAFT
6MRC AUG.2004
• Terminals (End Treatments)

An untreated end of a barrier is extremely hazardous if hit. A crashworthy
end treatment is therefore considered essential if the barrier terminates
within the clear zone and / or is in an area where it is likely to be hit head
on by an errant motorist. The end treatment should not spear, vault or roll a
vehicle for head-on or angled impacts.
3.2.3 Median Safety Barriers
a) General
A median safety barrier should only be installed if the consequences of hitting the
barrier are less severe than those that would result if no barrier existed.
Note: The preferred side slope for a traversable median IS ~1 :20. The normal
maximum side slope is 1: 1O.
The minimum performance level for median barrier of R4 & U4 geometries standard
and above is NCHRP 350 TL - 3. This type of barrier will contain and redirect
passenger vehicles but where there is a high percentage of heavy vehicles, adverse
geometries (horizontal curvature and gradient), or severe consequences of vehicular
(or cargo) penetration into the opposing traffic lanes, higher performance barriers
having significantly greater capabilities are used.
b) Median Barrier Performance Requirements
The parameters used to determine median barrier performance level are:
• the design speed for new roads and the 85 th percentile operating speed on existing
roads,
• the percentage of heavy vehicles in the AADT.
• the offset to the face of the barrier from the edge of adjacent traffic lane, and
31
DRAFT
6MRC AUG.2004
• a modified estimated AADT for the road 5 years hence.
(i) The modified AADT, AADT sM is calculated by the following formula:

AADT SM+ 0.7 x Kg x K: X AADT s+
Where:
Kg Road gradient adjustment factor, from Figure 3.6

Kc Curve radius adjustment factor from, Figure 3.7
AADT s+ 1. The current AADT projected 5 years hence for
existing roads.
2. The AADT expected 5 years after opening for
new sections of road.
NOTES:
b.l The smallest radius / steepest grade combination on the
section of road where the median barrier is to be
installed must be used, and both directions of traffic
considered.
b.2 AADT is:
• the total two-way AADT for a centrally located
double sided median barrier, or
• the directional one-way AADT where a single
sided median barrier is located adjacent to the
median traffic lane, ego on one, or both,
carriageways of an independently aligned and
graded dual carriageway road.
(ii) AADT SM+ is compared with the adjusted AADT range in the relevant
Percentage of Trucks/Barrier Offset/Design Speed cell of:
• Table 3.8 for a double sided centrally located median barrier,
and
• Table 3.9 for a single sided barrier located adjacent to the
median traffic lane.
32
_______________............_J
DRAFT
6MRC AUG.2004
(iii) If the AADT 5M+ is greater than the higher value in the AADT Traffic
range a NCHRP 350 TL - 4, type of barrier is warranted.
NOTES:
1. An explicit level of accuracy should not be implied for Tables 3.8 and
3.9.
2. Designer's should always apply engineering judgment to the selection
of median barrier performance levels and specify higher than TL - 4
performance level barriers when they are considered necessary.
~
it
I
!Z
w -2
............
~
~
I" ~
'
i
~1
I(UP GRADE)
I I
(DOWN GRADE)
I I I I I I
-7 -6 --5 -4 ~ -2 -1 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
PERCENT GRADE IN DIRECTION OF TRAFFIC
Figure 3.6: Road Grade Adjustment Factor, Kg

33
DRAFT
6M RC AUG 2004
_ _ _ _ _ _ _o+-_-t---f-+_--t_'::C.u 4---+---+_+-+
1 Pe
~
-------~r_-+---t-+---+-
~
u.:
-BARRIER
-----+-+----+-+---+--!Z 3---+---+-+
---.-,r---~-+-_t_-_+_~ J-+--+-+......._I-- _
~
__.I-+-'I-t-\. _ i
--+----+~+_+-__t-o-2--_+--+-+-_+-_..I-----
(BARRIER ON OUTSIDE OF CURVE)

I I
(BARRIER ON INSIDE OF CURVE)
I I
I
-300 ~ -1000 1000 500 300
-400 -600 600 400
RADIUS
T~
Figure 3.7: Horizontal Curvature Adjustment Factor, K c
c)
Adjusted AADT Ranges (vpd)
Barrier Offset
Percentage Trucks Design Speed (km/h)
from edge of
in Total AADT 80 100 110
Traffic Lane (m)
TL-3 TL-3 TL-3
0-1 5,500 to 162,200 3,000 to 107,300 2,100 to 63,100
1-2.1 6,300 to 188,600 3,300 to 126,300 2,300 to 80,000
5
2.1 -3.6 8,400 to 247,300 4,100 to 158,400 2,700 to 96,400
>3.6 I 1,200 to 314,700 5,000 to 203,800 3,100to 127,600
0-1 4,700 to 50,000 2,800 to 39,600 2,000 to 32,100
1 - 2.1 5,400 to 61,400 3,100 to 47,500 2,300 to 38,500
10
2.1-3.6 7,200 to 70,600 3,900 to 53, I 00 2,600 to 42,200
>3.6 9,600 to 88,500 4,700 to 67,600 3,000 to 53,000
0-1 4,100 to 29,600 2,700 to 24,300 2,000 to 21,500
1 - 2.1 4,800 to 36,700 2,900 to 29,300 2,200 to 25,300
15
2.1 - 3.6 6,300 to 41,200 3,700 to 31,900 2,600 to 27,000
>3.6 8,400 to 51,500 4,500 to 40,500 3,000 to 33,500
0-1 3,700 to 21,000 2,500 to 17,500 1,900 to 16,200
1-2.1 4,300 to 26, I00 2,800 to 21,100 2, I00 to 18,900
20
2.1 - 3.6 5,600 to 29,100 3,500 to 22,800 2,500 to 19,900
>3.6 7,500 to 36,300 4,200 to 28,900 2,900 to 24,400
Table 3.8: Performance Level Selection Table for a Centrally Located Double
Sided Median Barrier (Source: Transit New Zealand)
34
DRAFT
6MRC AUG.2004
Adjusted AADT Ranges (vpd)

Barrier Offset
Percentage Trucks Design Speed (km/h)
from edge of
in Total AADT 80 100 110
Traffic Lane (m)
TL-3 TL-3 TL-3
0-1 2,800 to 81,100 1,500 to 53,700 i ,100 to 31,600
1-2.1 3,200 to 94,300 1,700 to 63,200 1,200 to 40,000
5
2.1 - 3.6 4,200 to 123,700 2, I00 to 79,200 1,400 to 48,200
>3.6 5,600 to 157,400 2,500 to 10 I,900 1,600 to 63,800
0-1 2,400 to 25,000 1,400 to 19,800 1,000 to 16,100
1-2.1 2,700 to 30,700 1,600 to 23,800 1,200 to 19,300
10
2.1 - 3.6 3,600 to 35,300 2,000 to 26,600 1,300 to 21,100
>3.6 4,800 to 44,300 2,400 to 33,800 1,500 to 26,500
0- I 2,100 to 14,800 1,400 to 12,200 1,000 to 10,800
1-2.1 2,400 to 18,400 1,500 to 14,700 1,100 to 12,700
15
2.1 - 3.6 3,200 to 20,600 1,900 to 16,000 1,300to 13,500
>3.6 4,200 to 25,800 2,300 to 20,300 1,500 to 16,800
0-1 1,900 to 10,500 1,300 to 8,800 1,000 to 8,100
1 - 2.1 2,200 to 13,100 1,400 to 10,600 1,100 to 9,500
20
2.1-3.6 2,800 to 14,600 1,800 to I 1,400 1,300 to 10,000
>3.6 3,800 to 18,200 2,100 to 14,500 1,500 to 12,200
Table 3.9: Performance Level Selection Table for a Single Sided Barrier Located
Adjacent to the Median Traffic Lane (Source: Transit New Zealand)
c) Median Barrier Placement
The most desirable median is one that has relatively flat slopes, ie. preferably
::;1 :20 and normally not more than 1: 10 and is free of rigid objects. In these
conditions the barrier can be placed at the centre of the median. When these
conditions cannot be met the following placement guidelines should be
followed:
(i) General
Figure 3.8 illustrates the three basic types of median cross section. Section 1
applies to depressed medians or medians with a ditch section, Section 2 to
stepped medians or medians that separate carriageway with significant
differences in elevation and Section 3 to raised medians, or median berms.
35
DRAFT
6MRC AUG.2004
w
I
~
~
. a
't
~
I: W/2
b
•
c
- W/2
d
:1
e
i
..
c
.!i!
u
...I:""
..
w .go
w
---.J
I l---
I I
I I
I
1 (a)
1 (b)
1 (c)
2 (a)
2 (b)
2 (c)
SECTION 2
I
I
I
I
I
,
I
I
3 (a) SECTION 3
Figure 3.8: Median Barrier Placement

(Source: Transit New Zealand)'
36
DRAFT
6M RC AUG.2004
d) Barrier Type
It is desirable that the same type of barrier be used throughout the full length
of a section of road, and that the barrier be placed in the middle of a flat
median.
However, it will be necessary to deviate from this policy in some cases. For
example, the median cross section shown in Figure 3.9 l(a) may require a
barrier on both sides of the median. If a median barrier is warranted upstream
and downstream of this section, the median barrier should be 'split' as
illustrated in Figure 3.9. Most operational median barriers can be split this
way, especially box beams, W-beam types and shaped concrete barriers.
TRAFFIC)
E of traffic lane
med laft barrier
Ed~ of troffic lone

( TRAFFIC
* Flare rate should not exceed suggested limits (Refer to Table 3.6)
Figure 3.9: Split Median Barrier Layout

37
DRAFT
6MRC AUG.2004
3.3 OTHER CONSIDERATIONS 4
3.3.1 Combination of Safety Barrier Systems

4
• Combination of difference type of barriers within a short distance is not

advisable. However, if the combination is unavoidable, a non-rigid barrier c
should be gradually stiffened on the approach to a connection with a more u
rigid barrier. As a general rule, a ~exible barrier (wire rope barrier) should D
never be connected directly to a rigid barrier (concrete barrier) or vice d
verse. It should be gradually stiffened on the approach to a connection b
with a semi-rigid barrier such as w-beam guardrail.
t<
e
c
1]
PI
38
DRAFT
6MRC AUG.2004
4.0 CONCRETE BARRIERS
4.1 INTRODUCTION
Concrete barrier is a rigid type of longitudinal traffic barrier which does not deflect
upon impact. The basic function of concrete barrier is to redirect a vehicle that hits it.
During collisions, energy is dissipated by raising and lowering the vehicle and by
deformation of the vehicle sheet metal. The energy management feature of concrete
barriers is able to redirect the colliding vehicle stably without any rolling movement.
Concrete median barriers were used in the mid 1940s in California U.S.A. as a device
to minimize the number of out-of-control trucks penetrating the barrier and to
eliminate the need for costly and dangerous narrow median barriers maintenance
concerns that are still valid today as they were 50 years ago.
The following plates illustrate the vanous types of concrete barriers installed In
Malaysia.
Plate 4.1: 'Vertical wall' concrete barrier at Middle Ring Road 2 (Kepong)
39
DRAFT
6MRC AUG.2004
Plate 4.2: Concrete Barrier with anti glare screen & metal cladding for gantry
post along Jalan Damansara (Damansara Utama)
Plate 4.3: Concrete barrier median taper at New Pantai Expressway (Subang)
40
DRAFT
6MRC AUG2004
Plate 4.4: Concrete barrier at sharp bend along Jalan Semantan (K. Lumpur)
Plate 4.5: Concrete barrier median at Middle Ring Road 2 (Kepong)
41
DRAFT
6MRC AUG.2004
4.2 CONCRETE BARRIERS DESCRIPTION AND BEHAVIOR
Generally, concrete barrier can be categorised into 2 categories namely:

i) Constant slope barrier e.g. Texas constant slope (see Figure 4.1)
ii) Multi slopes barrier e.g. New Jersey Type (see Figure 4.2)
The New Jersey Barrier under the multi slopes barrier category is the most widely
used design. It was first used in New Jersey in 1955 and the Malaysian Road
Authority (JKR) had adopted the design in the mid eighties.
The New Jersey Barrier of Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) has 75mm
vertical reveal at the base, the next 255mm rises at a 55-degree angle and the
remainder at an 84-degree angle (as measured from horizontal).
The New Jersey barrier adopted by JKR has the same profile as the one adopted by
FHWA, but their slopes height varies as shown in Figure 4.3.
To determine the most appropriate profile to be used as concrete barrier, a parametric

study (systematically varying the parameters) of various profile configurations that
were labeled A through F was carried out and the study showed that F performed
distinctly better than the FHWA NJ-shape. The results of these computer simulations
were confirmed by a series of full scale crash tests. Figure 4.4 illustrates the F-shape
barrier. The slopes of the F-shape barrier and the FHWA NJ-shape are the same. The
major difference is that the distance from the ground to the slope break point of the F
shape barrier is 255mm which is 75rnm lower than the FHWA NJ-shape. The lower
PAVI
slope break point significantly reduced the lifting of the vehicle and greatly improved
the performance of the concrete barrier.
42
DRAFT
6MRC AUG.2004
203
Figure 4.1: Texas Constant Slope Concrete Barrier
1110
SECTlON
~
H
50 810
IlO 10i'0
SECTION
Figure 4.2: New Jersey-Shape Concrete Barrier (FHWA)
43
DRAFT
6MRC AUG.2004
Th
the
be
0
typ
sha
A250 aBc
ImI
up'
we,
mOl
oft
I. J7S .1 I. fror
Figure 4.3: New Jersey-Shape Concrete Barrier bun
(JKR Arahan Teknik (Jalan) 1/85) whe
4.3
It is
125
requ
the
vehi
waIT
SECTION
H
eo 810
~ llJlll
SECTION
Figure 4.4: F-Shape Concrete Barrier (FHWA)
4.2.1 Design Parameters of Multi Slopes Barriers
44
DRAFT
6MRC AUG.2004
The key design parameter for a safety shape profile is the distance from the ground to
the slope break point because this determines how much the vehicle suspension will
be compressed. For the F-shape barrier, this distance is 255mm whereas the NJ-shape
type, it is 330mm high. When a vehicle impacts with the barrier for the common
shallow-angle impact, the barrier is intended to minimize sheet metal damage by
allowing the vehicle tires to ride up on the lower sloped face. However, for higher
impact angles, the vehicle front bumper impacts the upper sloped face and slide
upwards. This interaction initiates lifting of the vehicle. The bumper is relatively
weak, the front end starts to crush before any uplift occurs. As the vehicle becomes
more nearly parallel with the barrier, the wheel contacts the lower sloped face. Most
of the additional lift of the vehicle is caused by the lower sloped face compressing the
front suspension. Modem vehicles have relatively short distances between the
bumper and the wheel; as a result, bumper contact is followed almost immediately by
wheel contact.
4.3 CONCRETE BARRIERS SELECTION
It is evident that both NJ-Shape and F-Shape barrier have met the Test Level 4 & 5
requirements in the NCHRP Report 350. However, in terms of safety performance,
the F-shape performs better than the NJ-Shape for small vehicles with respect to
vehicle roll. It is thus recommended that the F-Shape concrete barrier, where
warranted, be used for installation on major expressway and federal roads.
45
DRAFT
6MRC AUG.2004
4.4 RECOMMENDATION
The F-Shape concrete barrier shall be considered for road (R4 & U4 geometries
standard and above) with high embankment (2:10m) and also for divided road with
narrow median width (:s 205m). The following summarises the guidelines for final
selection of the F810 & FI070 F-Shape concrete barriers:
(sa:
---
HOI[ 1)
a) To adopt 810mm F-shape concrete barrier (F810) for: flNIS>ED ROAD 1I1
• highway I roads with design speed < 100kph and percentage of heavy vehicle
composition is low and the expected performance test level ofTL-3 & 40
b) To adopt 1070mm F-Shape concrete barrier (FI070) for:

• expressway or divided highway with design speed 2: 100kph and percentage of
heavy vehicle composition is high and the expected performance test level of TL
5 is required.
The details of the recommended barriers F810 & FI070 are shown in Figure 405, 4.6
&4.7.
46
~
4T16 lONClTlJ01NAL BAR
C()flTlNUOUS FOR .....OLE BARRIER
- aT!6
~
<1
~
tl
;.
(5((
NOll: I)
<d <l fl<19lID ROAD l£\uf------------------------------------:i
- ,- .. .' ~ ~ •....
610
1-
.:'" f ' .•.•...;
SECTION A-A
F810 SECTION
F810 BARRIER ELEVATION VIEW
DANNACE SlOT OlY(N51ONS AND LOCAnONS SHOJLO
BE PROVlO€ll BY A ENGlN[£R AND
""EN mE fLOW J.lUST BE
CAARIEQ ACROSS A BARRIER SEC nON.
00 A 15
IlI\lI£D ROAD l£1U
F1070 SECTION
nNlSH(O ROAl) L(V£L
,
~-br--,...,,.....,...+-J
1
1-'--""---------1
F810 SECTION (ROADSIDE)
~
.. N SEALANT
-I
FLEXCELL
EXPANSION JOINT CONTRACTION JOINT

(TO BE PROVlO€ll AT 30m c/C) (TO SE PROlAOEO AT 10m C/C)
FIGURE 4.5
aTl6 8ARS
,"'~"AA"-~
.,,~ ~~,
0
I \ ~T
4T16 lONQT\JDlNAt. BAR
, \ "'.~ CON TlNUOUS FOR ""OLE 8ARR1ER
--------------------------------~----~---~---~--
, t I I
-------------------------------------------1----,----,----i-
I [ 1 I
I l I l
I t I I
I I I I
---------------------------------~---------1----,----, ----1--
t I I I
________________ , ...J ' 1 -' __
I I I I
I I I I
I I , t
I I I I
I I , I
, I
,
I I I I
--------------------------------,----,----,----,--
I t I I
,
I
I I I I
I-----------------------,;;------~----~----~----~-l
h---=--~-;___,_____,_~-__,_.,,....,.,_...,.....,,._;_~,.___.,,-,--___,_,_~,__.____:_.,,....,_:_;_1------!.
~ ~4• • " ',".. '.' f .. '. ~. BAR A (T10)
SECTION B-B
VArlON VIEW ANCHORAGE
o 2SO
25 mm RECESS
'\
o ,,
~~~~_r--~---------------- --' ~~~AG~~~I;;' ANCHOR'--+~~l!!~====:::ti
SOlT AND 'HASHER,
UECHANlCAU. V F ASll:NEO
AT 760 mm CEN TERS.
~
~ fltllSHEO ROAD l£\o{l flNlS><EO ROAll LEVEL
~-'--~~~
.....
~
...... " " ~. ;..; "~.' ~=-"-.'"'.......:.~.'"
..:~.:...~.._'._J. --51
--I
SPLIT LEVEL
BARRIER AGAINST WALL
1. All edges sholl be rounded with a 25 mm radius

except as shown.
2. Concrete sholl be Grode 30,
3. All dimensions are in millimeters (mm) unless otherwise slaled.
BAO< ~ fllONT SIDES
ARE S'rl.AETR1CAl
THRIE BEAM TO F-SHAPE CON
THRIE BEAM TO F-SHAPE CONCRETE

FIGURE 4.6
5 NOS, 22 nun 01'" HlQl ST, BOlTS

.... 1H 70 x 76 • 9 MIN, W~
UHODl NUTS
(
,
I
'
: 0
:? I' <J
1 I
0"
I
Q~
,,
:"
FN9<£D ROAl> l£\{l o F1N1SH(l) ROAl> l£1U

<J
VIEW A-A VIEW B-B
APE CONCRETE BARRIER TRANSITION DETAIL
, \
,
r
I o
".
I
I
4'
I' .I
I t
I I
I I
'/<1 o I
.: ·v
I ,
'<J\t,
"
I
I
,1I
I 1
) \
, I \
I '7' \
1\7/
I
<1. ,
\
\
\
I \
o o
lL 4
...:....-'
'7_ <J"_ ''-----'
VIEW c-c
1. All edges shall be rounded with a 25 mm radius

except as shawn.
2, Concrete shall be Crode 30.
CONCRETE BARRIER TRANSITION DETAIL (MEDIAN) 3. All dimensions afe in m~fimeters (mm) unless otherwise stated.
mtlSHEO ROAD l£~ .....-
~-~~~-'"iH
tL-..---_
F-SHAPE BARRIER RAMPED TERMINAL TREATMENT (ISOMETRIC VIEW)
1 - - - + - I - - - - - l f l J P POST
r++----+-+-----~ ~TE CAlVAIIStD

,.-----r..9iAl'( 8A11Rlm
l.l.10 SOCT 'K1'H 75m",

lCtlG ElolOOlOED sPU I \
SU:CVl: \
1.110 BOt.T .... lH 75mm
++
lll<G EV8OlOlll SI'U I-JI---_ _
+
SJ.£N f-SHAPE 8ARRl(R
_ ROAOl£\U
I--m"",ri---:-~--I
~r-----'------T--:e= .
",~::=,
.'...:c-~---j
•._~"",--1
11.-1---- SOmm C(WCR£\'[
8lJ/()lHG
I
TYPICAL SECTION OF METAL CLADDING F-SHAPE

VIEW A-A BARRIER FOR STREET LIGHTING POST
FIGURE 4.7
----------------------------------------- ~
---------~
F-SHAPE BARRIER RAMPED TERMINAL TREATMENT
T25 DEFOAMEO
OOv.ELS
15 7S
CONCRETE
'6 _!_ _2_';ll'--_I--,,,,6y
o
BARRIER DOWELLED TO
CONCRETE SURFACE
620 I f
[25 DEH)R", ED
DO\\fi
~
/1
l
," "
~
"
,
~ j
" " J9 ~
H ~
.4 " -: ," ;, '£I
Ll ~,
", ,,,'
" , .1', ,~
~
~ ~
~
<1
"
"
~ " <l
</
,'"<1, ' 'A

"
~
<1
IlR .<1. ; '~ " <1
<l " q ~,
'~
"
(,M <M 600 =
(PLAN VIEW)
) DOWEL PLACEMENT LAYOUT
FOR BARRIER OO\\£lLEO TO CONCRETE SURFAct:
~
1. All edges sholl be rounded with a 25 mm radius
except as shown.
2, Concrete sholl be Grode JO,
3. All dimensions ore in millimeters (mm) unles5 othcrwise st~t'!d.
DRAFT
6MRC AUG.2004
5.0 W-BEAM GUARDRAIL
5.1 INTRODUCTION
5.1.1 General
W-Beam Guardrail is a semi-rigid barrier system which can be used in areas where
small to moderate deflection is acceptable (maximum deflection of 1.2m). It can be
classified into two (2) groups:
a) Strong Beam / Weak Post
The strong beam / weak post concept, is that the posts near the
point of impact are purposely designed to break away so that
the force of impact is distributed by beam action to a relatively
larger number of posts. Attributes of this system are (1) barrier
performance is independent of impact point at or between
posts and of soil properties, and (2) vehicle snagging on a post
is virtually eliminated.
b) Strong Beam / Strong Post
The strong beam / strong post concept is that the posts near the
point of impact are purposely designed to only deflect
moderately and the force of impact is distributed by beam
action to a smaller number of post. This is to be considered
when:
(i) Minimal deflection is required.
(ii) Transitioning to rigid objects such as bridge parapets.
The W-Beam guardrail can be used on both the shoulders and the median. The details
of both the off side and near side W-Beam guardrails are as shown in Figure 5.1.
47
DRAFT
6MRC AUG.2004
It has to be highlighted that the W-Beam guardrail is a relatively rigid object to be

impacted and will cause relatively serious injury to errant motorist, particularly
motorcyclists. Care should be exercised to install them only in places where their
absence will likely cause a more serious injury. It is of utmost importance that the
design guidelines outlined in this chapter be incorporated in the standard drawings for
guardrails. A sample of standard drawings for W-Beam guardrail is as attached in
Appendix 5A.
5.1.2 Safety Performance ofW-beam guardrail
Longitudinal roadside barriers are used to shield motorists from natural or human
made obstacles located along either side of the traveled way, and sometimes to protect
pedestrians and bicyclists
W-beam guardrail must contain and redirect vehicles. Because of the complicated
dynamic behavior involved, the most effective way to ensure performance of the W
beam guardrail is through full scale crash testing. As crash testing facilities and
standards are not available in Malaysia, the standard crash tests presented in NCHRP
Report 350, "Recommended Procedures for the Safety Performance Evaluation of
Highway Features" are adopted for this guideline. To match barrier performance to
service needs, a series of six (6) test levels are recommended to evaluate occupant
risk, structural integrity and post impact vehicle behavior. Various vehicle masses,
velocities and impact angles are included.
The W-beam guardrail with block out units and with 2.0m post spacing fulfils the
requirements of Test Level 3 (TL 3)
48
DRAFT
4 6MRC AUG.2004
5.2 BLOCKED-OUT STEEL W-BEAM GUARDRAIL
5.2.1 Description and Behavior under Impact
The blocked-out steel W-beam guardrail recommended to be used in Malaysia (Figure

5.1) consists of a steel beam of W-shape cross-section attached to spacers supported
on posts. Generally, spacers and posts are constructed of steel. Concrete posts and
timber posts are not favored because of poor impact performance.
Figure 5.1: Blocked-Out Steel W-beam guardrail

--
ON MEDIAN ON SHOULDER
----, ..
I~ €-r
710
-11 710 ==r1
!
~~ I
______-J ~____......_-l
I
I -~ ~!
__ -- ~ -~ 81
u._~ TI_~
U~
1.1845 MB4S M845
BLOCKED-OUT 'W' BLOCKED-OUT 'w' BLOCKED-OUT 'w'
BEAM (STEEL POST) BEAM (STEEL POST) BEAM (S[EEL POST)
2,Om SPACING 4,Om SPACING
MAXIMUM DEFLECTION O.6m 10m 1.2m
POST SPACING 2.0m 2.0m 4.0m
C SECTION C SECTION C SECTION

POST
150 X 76 )( 6 mm 150 x 76 x 6 mm 150 x 76 x 6 mm
TWO STEEL C SINGLE STEEL C SINGLE STEEL C

BEAM SECTIONS SECTION SECTION
150 X 76 X 6 mm 150 X 76 X 6 mm i 150 )( 76 X 6 mm
OFF SET BRACKETS TWO C SECTIONS SINGLE C SECTION SINGLE. C SECTION

150 )( 76 X 6 mm 150 X 76 X 6 mm 150 )( 76 x 6 mm
MOUNTINGS 16 mm DIA STEEL 16 mm DIA STEEL 16 mm DIA STeEL

BOLTS BOLTS BOLTS
NONE NONE NONE
FOOTING (EXCEPT AT POINTS (EXCEPT AT POINTS (EXCEPT AT POINTS
OF TRANSITION) OF TRANSITION) OF TRANSITION)
49
DRAFT
6MRC AUG.2004
The W-Beam Guardrail is classed as being 'semi-rigid' because it deflects

substantially but not excessively under the U.S. standard structural adequacy crash
test; i.e. undergoes a dynamic deflection of 0.8 - 0.9m (and a maximum deflection of
1.2m for post spacing of 2.0m) and a pennanent deflection of 0.5 - 0.6 m when hit at
an angle of 25 degrees by a 2 tones vehicle traveling at up to 100 km/h. It follows that
this type of guardfence can require extensive repair after a severe impact, and this
may have safety, cost and road capacity implications.
Under substantial impact the guardrail has been designed to behave as follows:
(a) The W-beam first bends and then flattens out forming a wide
tension band to contain the impacting vehicle.
(b) The posts are initially restrained by passive pressure in the

soil, resulting in local failure of the soil at the ground line and
for a short distance below.
(c) The steel posts partially rotate, with their point of rotation
some distance below the ground and also bend near the ground
line.
Figure 5.2: W-beam Guardrail Post Displacement
W-Beam
. ~ ,-r; fr:-""..4;-11---,.
", , "
','
\
\ I
v\
\
,~
\
\ \
\
,
\
\
\\
Spacer
.r-~
\ \
\ -Post
_/ ,
\
Source: Safety Barriers, Considerations for the Provision of Safety Barriers on
Rural Roads, National Association of Australian State Road Authorities, 1987
50
DRAFT
6MRC AUG.2004
(d) Deflection of the posts and spacers causes the line of action of
the restraining force, acting on the side of the vehicle, initially
to rise, before ultimately dropping (Figure 5.2), thus
minimizing the risk of vehicle vaulting or roll over; the
spacers also lessen the risk of vehicle wheels snagging on the
post.
(e) The post eventually yield and the rail tears away from the bolt
heads and restrains the vehicle by tension.
Note: A 1984 u.s. report (FHWA 1984) suggest that the large
rectangular washers, previously included, may be omitted
from under the heads of bolts holding the W-beam to the
spacers. This allows the W-beam to pull free of the spacers to
facilitate the action indicated in (e) above.
(f) Additionally, if steel spacers and posts are used, the tendency
of the W-Beam ho hinge or tear on the spacers can be
minimised by ensuring there are two thicknesses of W-Beam
at every spacer, e.g. by inserting a steel back-up of W-Beam
section at every spacer at which the W-beam is not spliced
(Figure 5.3).
Figure 5.3: W-Beam Guardrail Assembly - General Arrangement

/-BaCkU p Plate
: I : l) i :"; : 1'1--------,-.,;,: -.,F==1-.;;-r-----I
-r---'-'::o-,:-t"'-'! :=--+-- --/-7.6-- ---+-:-:' :-'---',~,4-----'-': :-:,. _~'1
:Iu I I n : : : I I :~ 0: ?
SPlice) ~ LW-Beom I Splice J
-Post
; .. );A ON
2000 2QQQ. - --<V---- -. ----1
NOTE Backup plates required where Beam not spliced, if spacers are steel.

51
DRAFT
6MRC AUG.2004
The guardrail deflection lessens the rate of change of momentum of the impacting
vehicle and its occupants which can significantly reduce vehicle damage and personal
mJury.
Sometimes, however, a stiffer barrier is required, capable of giving more restraint to

heavy vehicle, or of limiting deflections on impact; e.g. narrow medians on roads with
restricted cross-section. W-beam guardrail may not be appropriate in such situations.
5.2.2 Guardrail Height
Figure 5.1 shows the normal W-beam heights for guardrail on level ground. The
roadside in front of the Guardrail may require special treatment (including on going
maintenance) to ensure that vehicle bumpers hit the guardrail at the correct level; US
studies (AASHTO) 1977, Ross 1984) show that this level can be a critical factor in
ensuring adequate guardfence performance. A guardrail height of 710 mm (plus
minus 20mm) is recommended.
5.2.3 Location on Road Cross-section
Factors which influence where this type of Guardrail is located on the road cross
section include:
(a) Clearance required between the Guardrail and the hazard.

United States structural adequacy crash tests (AASHTO 1977)
indicate that about 1m clearance is required to ensure vehicles
do not strike a hazard via a deflected W-Beam Guardrail.
(b) Clearance required between the Guardrail posts and the edge
of an embankment. A clearance of 0.5 to 1.0 meter is normally
required to develop adequate passive resistance in average
soils, and sometimes the earthworks have to be widened to
achieve this.
52
DRAFT
6MRC AUG.2004
(c) The clearance needed between the Guardrail and the kerb (if
any). Figure 5.4 shows the clearance required to minimise any
potential for vehicles to vault the Guardrail after hitting the
kerb (AASHTO 1977).
Figure 5.4: W-Beam Guardrail Location
~ Preferably front 'a<:e of W-Beom aligned

" above face of k~rb; 01 terno~lvely ~lth~r {t"Ss
~han 1S0mm or gr<'(ller than 1.Om from foce of kerb
~-- ------_._
710
r b
710
b. Mountable or Sqmi -Mountublt' K~rb
• NOTE-Vanable, to conf«!m with individual Authority stondal'd~

o. Borrier or Se",i-Borrifr Kl?fb

(d) The clearance between the guardrail and the adjacent traffic
lane. It is of the desirable to provide vehicle standing room
between the traffic lane and guardrail located off the shoulder,
but in hilly terrain this is frequently impracticable.
Guardrail location in medians sometimes governed by the

clearance needed to ensure that guardrail deflection will cause
no interference with vehicles in the opposing carriageway.
(e) The clearance required the personnel or machinery to maintain

the roadway or shoulder alongside the guardrail.
53
DRAFT
6MRC AUG2004
5.2.4 Lateral Offset
W-beam guardrail should generally be placed as far from the traveled way as
conditions permit, to allow motorists the best chance of regaining control and to
provide better sight distance. It is desirable to maintain a uniform clearance between
traffic and roadside features such as W-beam guardrail. The distance beyond which a
roadside object will not be perceived as an obstacle and cause a motorists to reduce
speed or change position is known as the 'shy offset line'.
TABLE 5.1 SHY LINE OFFSET
Shy line offset

m ft
3.7 12. J
3.2 10.5
2.8 9.2
2.4 7.9
2.2 7_2
2.0 6.6
1.7 5.6
1.4 4.6
I. 1 3.6
Source: Highway Engineering Handbook, Second Edition, McGraw Hill
Handbooks, 2003 and AASHTO Road Design Guide
54
DRAFT
6MRC AUG.2004
5.3 INSTALLATION
5.3.1 Installation Length
Installation should be extended upstream from the warranted limits to prevent vehicle
access behind the protective system. It is not necessary to extend the installation
downstream past the hazard on highways with one way traffic. For highways with two
way undivided traffic, the installation should extend downstream.
Details of the installation is as shown earlier in Chapter 3 (Figure 3.4)
The length of need of a median barrier will include the full length of road along which
the barrier is required to prevent cross-median vehicle movement, as well as any
length required to shield other hazards.
Short sections of guardrail should be avoided as they are ineffective and often
introduce new hazards instead. As isolated length of guardrail on an embankment
should not be less than 30 meters. For high speed facilities, a minimum of 75 meters
is desirable. Short length of guardrail is only useful as a warning of the presence of
obstruction or hazard but is inadequate as a physical protection
5.3.2 Transitions to Rigid Objects

(Transition to Bridge Railings)
The joining of semi-rigid W-beam guardrail to a more rigid barrier (e.g. Bridge Rail
or concrete barrier) requires the use of a progressively stiffened transition of W-beam
guardrail to minimise the potential for vehicles to pocket behind the end of the stiffer
barrier.
A transition may also be needed where a W-beam guardrail joins the exit end of a
stiffer barrier, to protect vehicles approaching from the other direction. Generally, a
transition section should not overlap any part of the 12 meter length of a breakaway
terminal. The following are considerations in the design of transitions of W-beam
guardrail to rigid objects:
55
DRAFT
6MRC AUG.2004
1. The splice between the rail of the approach barrier and the
bridge rail should develop the tensile strength of the approach
rail.
11. Strong post systems, or combination of normal post and strong
beam systems, can be used for transitions. These systems
normally should be blocked out to avoid snagging.
111. Use a gradual transition, normally 10 to 12 times the difference
in lateral deflection of the two systems. Gradually stiffen by
decreasing the post spacing, increasing post size and
strengthening the rail (e.g. Nested W-beams or Thrie Beams)
IV. Eliminate kerb, inlets and other drainage features in front of
the W-beam. Keep the slope between the edge of the driving
lane and W-beam Barrier to 1: 10 or less
v. When possible, relocate roads that intersect near the end of the
bridge and interfere with proper transition. Crash cushions may
provide an option in some cases.
Figure 5.5 shows general details for a typical transition.
FIGURE 5.5 TYPICAL TRANSITIONS

(W-Beam Guardrail to Rigid Barrier)
1
?OSIIKl.; :lor
~I /
J. I·
3
"
~ ~
I
I

and Standard Drawings, JKR Malaysia, 2004
56
DRAFT
6MRC AUG.2004
The treatment above can also be used when there is a rigid object placed less than
1.0m behind the W-beam guardrail (e.g. bridge piers, gantry signs, street lights, etc).
As such, the guardrail needs to be made stiffer to reduce the deflection.
5.3.3 Installation ofW-Beam Guardrail in Vicinity of Concrete Drains
As W-beam guardrail post requires lateral earth pressure to allow it to bend and
deflect, it needs to be a minimum of 600mm of earth behind the post as shown in
Figure 5.6 below.
Figure 5.6: Minimum Lateral Earth Clearance
Required Behind W-beam Guardrail
600
I
i ~ ~ ,
...--t--I-+-ollft"'-- BUTTO~ HEAD BOLT WITH RECESS NUT TO BE
i f', CONST~UCTED WITH RAIL ELEMENT SPLICE.
710 i\ V I
!
,ni 1500
(600 MIN.) !
fiNISHED GROUND LEVEL
~
[W
i
I·
•!
~
•.. .
.:'1 ! i·;)
'~I~":
_! -i-~I-_------'''''''
~ i,·I-----+<>"t-----:1:;4~i-11 -+.- -,
:.....•,_ .•:~.._.!, 1100 I' I I I ,
: .i 1 i .:
------
LACE GRADE 20/40 CONCRETE AFTER RAILS

- "--1 ! r--" ARE INSTALLED AND ALIGNED
j : ! :
I : I
L_t--'
d()()'mm
Source: Designed for Malaysia Road Conditions, REAM, 2004
57
'[
DRAFT
6MRC AUG.2004
Where it is not possible to provide 600mm clearance to the concrete drain, the W
Beam Guardrail needs to be made rigid to minimise deflection. This can be achieved
by:
(a) Concreting the post.
(b) Closing the post spacing to 1.0 m.
as shown in Figure 5.7 below:
Figure 5.7: Making the W-Beam Guardrail More Rigid
,0 I 1,101 ,'0 I 1',0 I ,0 I" 0 I ,0 ~ I 0 . ;
I: I:II I:II I:
L I d I'
I
e[11 I,
E
U")
-
0)
_,
I I
I I
I I
11-,-_
III f
t I
II
I I
r
I I
11
I' "
('
II
1]1, 1
I I
I I
1 I ~[:: ::
E
...-
at
-.-~
I I
I f
-.
1 1'1 I
I I
I l
I III I
11
1 I
I'
I I
Ii
I I
I
! I
t I
l
---
L.l_.lJ L..L_.1..J L.l_J..J LJ._.lJ

I , , I
t_~
S
'_J
~
I
1.0m 1.Orn 1 I._om _
Source: Designed for Malaysian Road Conditions, REAM, 2004
5.4 TERMINAL SECTIONS
Regardless of the type of barrier system employed, a typical installation is composed

of three components:
a) Upstream
b) Centre section of "length-of need", and
c) Downstream terminal section
58
DRAFT
6MRC AUG.2004
To prevent an errant vehicle from striking the warranting feature, the installation must
be extended a considerable distance upstream. Furthermore, terminal sections must be
added to both ends to anchor the system in order that redirecting force can develop in
the rail. There are three general types of guardrail terminal treatments:
i) Flares,
ii) Ramps, and
iii) Straight extensions
5.4.1 Flared Terminals
Flared terminals swing away from the pavement edge either in a straight or parabolic
manner as shown in Figure 5.8. Height of rail with respect to local grade is held
constant. A minimum offset of 1.2 meters (4 ft) should be provided but where space
permits 2.5 meters to 3 meters should be used. The flare should be gradual to flatten
the angle of impact by vehicles leaving the road. As a guide, the length of flare should
not be less than ten times the offset.
5.4.2 Ramped Terminals
Ramped terminals provide a Guardrail slope to the beam from effective rail height to
grade level as shown in Figure 5.9. The beam may be twisted 90° within the ramp
section and is generally anchored at-grade to a concrete footing. This type of terminal
is not suitable for use along a two lane two way road as it can vault errant vehicles
and should only be used along 4 or 6 lane dual carriageways on the departure side.
59
DRAFT
6MRC AUG.2004
Figure 5.8: Flared Terminal Treatment
TERMINAL SECTION
1_---12-.0-m-M-IN-IM-Ut-1 --~
END OF NEED OF GUARDRNL
VARIES- 1- ~ ! F
-- ~""U'm-j - - - - - ts:;:::r===L~~~.~~~~~
~
P,o\RABOLA
DIRECTION OF TRAVEL ~ EDGE or PAVEMENT
PLAN VIEW
MINIMUM VALUES : d= 1.2m. s = 12m

DETERMINE L FROM FORMULA
L=S=~l
2
OETERWNE OFFSETS FROM FORMULA
OffSET Y = (X)1 X d
T
COMPUTING THE PARABOUC CURVE
Source: Araban Teknik Jalan 1185, Manual on Design Guidelines of
Longitudinal Traffic Barrier, JKR Malaysia, 1985
60
DRAFT
6MRC AUG.2004
Figure 5.9: Ramped Terminal Treatment
90'1'MST GUARDRAIL
SEE PACKER DETAIL

(TYPE B)
- PACKER DETAiL
(SEE TYPE C)
I 30Smm IN LENGTH BACK UP PLATE.

MUST BE PLACE BEHIND RAIL ELEMENTS ;
I TOP OF RAIL ELEMENTTOBE
LAP IN DIRECTION CF TRAFFIC.]
AT INTERM~DlA TE POSTS (~PUCE FOOlTS) FLUSH WITH GROUND UNE.
, ,
550 1 J!L""'"'=~..u....---..u....'<1'11O~..___..u....---..u....------=::s:nr'_--F-IN-ISH-ED-GR-D-.L-EV-.
SPACING OF POST BEYOND
TERMINAL SHAlL BE 2000
-t ~ ~N:Ecn~
RAIL ELEMENT AND BOLTS
SHALL BE PCSJnoNED TO
ELEVATION VIEW PROPERAlIGJ'.I.1ENTPRIORTO
PLACING CONCRETE a.ASS 'C
AROUND POST
16inm '" BOLTWiTH HEX

NUT AND WASHER (GALVAMZED) lri I
16mrn III BOLT WITH
~
HEX NUT AND WJ\SHCR
(GALVANIZED')
~1 tlf
2 NOS 16mm o liE X HEAD BOLT
WITH STANDARD HEX NUT
GI CHANNEL SECTION
(GALVANIZED)
GICHANNELSEcnON
PACKER (TYPE A) PACKER (TYPE B) PACKER (TYPE C)
Source: Araban Teknik Jalan 1/85, Manual on Design Guidelines of

Longitudinal Traffic Barrier, JKR Malaysia, 1985 and customized to current
practices, 2004
61
DRAFT
6MRC AUG.2004
5.4.3 Straight Extensions
Straight extensions are additional lengths of the typical guardrail system, generally
with a standard end-wing added to the beam used, as shown in Figure 5.10. As these
can act as a spear to errant vehicles, they are not be used along 2 lane 2 way road and
shall only be used on 4 lane or 6 lane dual carriageway on the departure side.
5.4.4 Terminals Treatment
Guardrail end treatment IS an important safety consideration and an Improper

designed end treatment presents a hazard to traffic. Guardrail ends must be
strengthened to prevent excessive deflection and the possibility of the rail end
penetrating the vehicle occupant compartment. It should be noted that the ramps tends
to launch an errant vehicle and the flare increases the angle of impingement. To
remove this danger, the approach ends must be anchored to the ground to the ground
to give the needed stability to adjoining sections and should be flared well away from
the traveled way to prevent vehicles from striking the anchored ends with a resulting
over-ride or roll-over. If the approach ends are not flared back, they should be blended
into the approach environment. On approaches to structures, the guardrail must be
securely attached to the structure in order to give maximwn protection and to develop
full strength of the rail in tension and provide a relatively smooth configuration of the
traffic side (Plate 5. 1).
Plate 5.1 -Typical Transition

- W-Beam Guardrail to Rigid Barrier
62
DRAFT
6MRC AUG 2004
Figure 5.10: Straight Extension Terminal Treatment
LDNG SO. HllLOW

2000 2000 : SECTIOH
II
II
GUARlJRAll EU:M£HT
J
PLAN VIEW RETURH srrnOK

SEE llETAILS
2000 2000
-' r-
::V:
:, 1: 1
\ LAP 1M lIlEtTlOH Of TRAFfiC
~~~I
AlII
~ AI ~
-~~ •
GmtJl«l lU[ OR SllllllEl
SlJfAtING um RAIUHG
ELEVATION
.+.-+.
I i
~ ! 216 SLOnED KOLES 22x 2Bmm
I~ EOOmm. APPROX
Return Section Terminal
2000 s~o
....-----.
·1 . -.....
--
......
I I kMIHAl SmlON
.#OW .AUnY ~
ElIVATlON VIEW
Terminal Section ~ll DIMENSIONS IN mm.
Source: Arahan Teknik Jalan 1/85, Manual on Design Guidelines of

Longitudinal Traffic Barrier, JKR Malaysia, 1985
63
DRAFT
6MRC AUG.2004
5.4.5 Breakaway Terminals
Installing a breakaway terminal with drum end (Figures 5.11 and 5.12) or butting the
guardrail end to a cut face are two methods commonly used to shield the guardfence.
end while providing for development of impact-restraining tension in the W-beam.
The second method ensures that vehicles cannot go behind the guardrail, and also
avoids the need for a drum end.
The breakaway terminal· is designed to behave in the following way when hit end-on:
(a) The drum-end collapses to prevent vehicle penetration by the

W-Beam, the two end-posts break just above the ground (or
shear if they are steel posts with shear-bases), the end panel of
the W-beam crumples and the anchor cable falls to the ground;
(the cable plays no part in the collapse of the terminal).
(b) The remainder of the terminal then buckles like a curved

column with an eccentric load; release of the W-beam from the
spacers is assisted by omission of washers under the heads of
bolt connecting the W-beam to the spacers. The 12 meter-long
curved flare and omission of washers are therefore important
features of this terminal, which should be set out generally as in
Figure 5.11.
* (Note that the 'breakaway terminal' is referred to as a 'breakaway

cable terminal' in U S literature, but this term is considered misleading
because the cable does not influence the breakaway characteristics, its
function is simply to develop tension in the end panels of rail).
64
DRAFT
6MRC AUG.2004
Figure 5.11: W-Beam Guardrail Terminals
DRUM END ~
~~/
"'-/
BREAKWAY TERMINAL
PLAIN END
PLAIN TERMINAL

Note.
The first 2 poles need to be weakened. This can be achieved by cutting slots in
the posts.
65
DRAFT
6MRC AUG.2004
Figure 5.12: Breakaway Terminal Layouts
Drum end 4m
Collapsible Panel
12m
I· Breakaway Terminal
BREAKAWAY TERMINAL
General Arrangement
~---·I
L 'Parabola' offset measured
from tangent
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ~~Rood-------------
GUARDFENCE PARALLEL TO (l OF STRA!GHT ROAD
~ "I
--z= =10' offset meos,ured from
curved line equidistant from edge of road
-- __ -
- --~--------,;-Ro~
C._ -'
GUARDFENCE .oN INSIDE OF CURVE
.r--- 12m, _\
~-'P,,,b,I,' ,ft~1 m""red from

~ curved line equidistant from edge of rood
-RiiOd" - - - - - - - - - - -
------- -
~
_ - - - - .. 't.
GUARDFENCE ON OUTSIDE OF CURVE
66
DRAFT
6MRC AUG.2004
5.5 MODIFIED BLOCK OUT STEEL THRIE BEAM
5.5.1 On Shoulders
This system is intended where for locations where the guardrail is regularly hit. It is
also for use in locations where there is a high probability that the fence will be hit by
heavy vehicles, either due to high percentage of heavy vehicles in the traffic
composition or high volume of heavy vehicles. The rail is significantly more costly
than the conventional W-beam guardrail system, but this is repaid as the rail requires
less frequent replacement.
The system performs very well at low impact angles « 15 degrees), especially as
damage to the barrier is generally slight. The good performance with light vehicles
should be noted. The greater depth of the rail makes this system more tolerant of
depressions in the ground. Details of the recommended Thrie beams are as shown in
Figure 5.13.
5.5.2 On Median
This system has particular application in narrow medians. It is also intended for use at
locations where there is a high probability that the fence will be hit by heavy vehicles
with high centers of gravity. The rail is significantly more costly than the
conventional W-beam guardrails, but this can be balanced against lower repair costs.
The system performs very well at low impact angles «15 degrees) and damage to the
barrier is generally slight. It has good performance with light vehicles. The greater
depth of the rail makes this system more tolerant of depressions in the ground. Details
of the Thrie recommended beams are as shown in Figure 5.13.
67
DRAFT
6MRC AUG.2004
Figure 5.13: Thrie Beam Guardrails
On Median On Shoulder
CC'~<~ ~[)S1T2J~~~'!"-11]1L.:r~~tJI
-+ I ~'".d-J iJ,~~f- ,L ::~+1

-+50 ,. . . 150r 180
~
80S a
@/,@£.wJ~1w.w~.J
;; g
'.0 I
./I-fPJ
!::
...t.. .
/J ~/;'l//7//,a;:,,///;';
/c"""';
/11 .-" ; , j ,
" I.. "
fW,&;;:;
j
1
;~~ , z ~fW;% __ 1.1 ~ I i-'T'(T'O,-I g ,·-i"'f,mio, ~

g ::....- '---,
,
'" - _ ' - ••••1
f- \,.-_..1
Blocked-Out Thrie beam Modified Thrie beam Blocked-Out Thrie beam Modified Thrie beam
Maximum O.9m O.5m O.6m O.9m
Deflection
Post 2.0m 2.0m 2.0m 2.0m
Spacing
Post C Section C Section C Section C Section

150x76x6mm l50x76x6mm l50x76x6mm l50x76x6mm
Beam Two Thrie beams Two Thrie beams 12 gauge Thrie beam 12 gauge Thrie beam
OffSet Two C Section Two C Section Single C Section Single C Section
Brackets 150 x 76 x 6mm 350 x 76 x 6mm 150 x 76 x 6mm 350 x 76 x 6mm
Mountings 16mm Dia Steel Bolts 16mm Dia Steel Bolts 16mm Dia Steel Bolts l6mm Dia Steel Bolts
Footing none (Except at points of none (Except at points none (Except at points of none (Except at points
transition) of transition) transition) of transition)
68
DRAFT
6MRC AUG.2004
5.6 RECOMMENDATION
W-beam guardrail is a semi-rigid barrier system which can be used in areas where
small to moderate deflection is acceptable (maximum deflection of 1.2m for post
spacing of2.0m).
It has to be highlighted that the W-beam guardrail is a relatively rigid object to be

impacted and will cause relatively serious injury to errant motorist, particularly
motorcyclists. Care, in line with good engineering practices should be exercised by
the road design engineers to install them only in places where their absence will likely
cause a more serious injury. Detail consideration is to be given to the probability and
severity of accidents due to impact/collision with the W-beam guardrail.
Though W-beam guardrail has a low initial installation costs, its maintenance cost is
relatively high and disruption to traffic (particularly when impacted along the median)
can be an issue. As such, it should not be used in areas where vehicles is expected to
go off the road on a regular basis (at sub standard bends, at areas having high rainfall
along wide carriageway, at areas with high volume of heavy vehicles, etc) as this will
mean increased maintenance cost and higher likelihood of disruption to traffic.
The use of 4.0m post spacing should not be used along Expressways and the heavily
trafficked Federal and State Roads. Along these classes of roads, 2.0m post spacing is
to be used (maximum deflection of 1.2m).
69
DRAFT
6MRC AUG 2004
5.7 APPENDIX
5.7.1 Appendix 5A
STANDARD DRAWINGS FOR

W-BEAM GUARDRAILS
l
70
~
\
POSI 00..1 KU
~ POSI ,1: SLOI
j I 11 SlOlT(D t<l!S
1[~UlI"'- S(CI)()< U'PP[O I I '00
1-+.rF,.,.------r+.-----,~~_(N{) "'TIC
~ _ _J.iL w----''''''-''''''-''''''''''''-''-'''''--j_ {SEE ()(l~t "')
I
sPlON{; Of P()SI 1J(Y~C----'"'00QIll--_ -----''=---4
!E!lU'NAl. SHAU Ill: 2 I 100')
ELEVATION
~oin:t
lli.j
ELEVATION
jjQ
ELEVATION
1---Wl.....--r:
' "-",,,,-I(
1Y
"""
DETAIL 'A'-END WING

TERMINAL UNIT (TYPE 1) TERMINAL ANCHORAGE UNIT (TYPE 2
'''-114
IT:"
~_.~.~._.-
90' TWIST (TYPE 3)
I EL'EW
POST eQl StOl DETAIL T=rr
~ ,J ,.3. 3
~ I
t
1
$, $I
$
i
END Dom
2000
w W
(SI'O.I-":) (""''*'''''''I
ELEVATION
GUARDRAIL TO GRID PARAPET AND BRIDGE END TRANSITIONS DETAIL
'000
DETAIL 'A'
2 NOS. 1&'nm , H(X
~1TH STO. HEX 1M (,
DETAIL 'A'
_16rNT1 f 80li 'MrH H(X HL
DETAIL 'B' - TERMINATION 'w' -BEAM AT
,lIlD WA$HUl (CALV.)
RIGID PARAPET SECTION B-B
c'"
i:
jtA
_I ,I§ "I'~I~\
~I
-_
~I
tt
'
1mm
LO<;COfPIECE
AS 1!'D<1l/C Of CUAAORM.
INTER!,/[Ol/<T[ POST,USE Ji'---r-'1F·,·~
~
I~I~I TOl.(RJ."CE
l__ -Pl,\C[ C(»ICR[l, CRAI)( 20/
l6mm • BOLT WHH
H[X l~ul AliO WASH(R
(G.&l.VAIiI1£D)
SECTION
W
2 NOS T6mm _ ,lEX IlEAD BOt!
lJN;l( UP NT[ Of lO5 LONC 30mm _ HQ[ j Off
'llH sr~~OARD HEX H\I1
l-t'nn""I1IS1"""'ED'GROU""(~~V,"II[D)
~":fC( AI R.JIL CENTRE ~Omm.uo (CALV)
Rb' SPI/Cf JIB l)f ESL...E!i1l -
-d""A~~
", '. jS<t lAP IIi OO1(CnQ<'
Of IRI<f1lC rLOW
2J, 29 \l.OT1(O IIOlfS roo
SPUC( BOLTS 8 f)'f Ol'TlONAl C(/HR[ HOlE ~
•
n •
;:2_ 21
~I::':::'I:J - 3. :J Ul
fl-=k"!=-+-i 0 0
~., -,6~SLOT1[OHOl£_ \ \
1 3. 5700 POST SIXT I--*-'I /
. 400
- ., '08 -"- I m I l--llL-j
SIDE Q(VAnQ<' Of ClJ,l,Rl)AAL
ClW<NEL STtll POST & P/<C1([R
SlOE El£VATION or CUAROIWl.
CK/-.'II<[l mEL POST & P,ACK(R
2000 .00i! 1000
1
-I 1- ~9 I I:l8 I
SECTION A-A DETAIL OF V' BOl
SINGLE MOUNTED TYPE DOUBLE MOUNTED TYPE TYPICAL RAIL ELEMENT
TYPIC.i\L GU!\RD~j\.IL SYSTEMS ~l,L~8DRAll. FOR ROCK FOU_NDATIOlj
Appendix 5A
76
14 _11..3 []JIoI. SHO'JlOCR

~tT&.t;OO~1
'---l2-..tI
l.ll 19 ~onut...
--M!...
I'IW
PLA ELEVATION
l'II1 SPLICE BOLT
{/ ~r'~
~ ((n
II
\
Ill'
SPECIAL WASHER UNDER HEAO
OF POST BOLT
ELEVATION
UNIT (TYPE 2
DETAIL 'B' - TERMINAL
RETURN SECTION
PACKER (TYPE A) PACKER (TYPE B) PACKER (TYPE C)
l=Sd min 3OOClO 8000 16000
~
1[RlJ"'l. /.I!C!iOil.'a:
onJ,JJiiL.
rVi' Al 190!> Clc
![RllIW.l UNIT
(M'( 1)
U:" (M'( 1)
OffSET
~
to
X
n l:O"j3'UCTUIll:
bt \.IX't.,,;UW
BY TH£fnce'£ER ON SHE ------- ----------
tr===:t:==±:h.=<--l...,
[nO
,
S(cmll'~Ll~1
PWOOJe flAQ( (110
TREATMENT OF GUARDRAIL ON SINGLE CARRIAGEWAY AT

A FIXED STRUCTURE AND AT A BRIDGE
-2 NOS I &M> • H(X '!£AD IlOLfS

'llIH SIl). 10 NUl (CAlv.)
SHO\!UJ(R
~UJ(R 1
1,
rliF'El
T(R"''''t UWT (M'( I) ~
CUAAORJJL M[l(RI.lL R(OUR("(HTS (MSIHO "180- 78)
ll'.J(Kt\(SS
WVol.,rsillC
UIWUU~
(!lAS( "ETR)
YlQ.O STR(HCHi
2.67m
liDO 9/m \..IliUU" S!N(L( SPOI
TREATMENT OF GUARDRAIL ON DUAL CARRIAGEWAY AT J4S tJPo

50" , BOll '/llfli H(X NUl
.'l) Wo\SHUl (GAlV.) ""iUlJ." I£HSlL( STR(NC!H 4-83 UPo
A FIXED STRUCTURE AND AT A BRIDGE CLOHCAllOH (50<001 I[ST P1(C() 12~ UlNlJ.lUM
l6d
lLSl:CllOO NOTE:
IIlI
""mo (Cltv.)
"'f-'If:'
0"'" '6
,.
cc
,
(APfROI) ( ~\l[NSiOH ARC 'N 1lUl"[TR(S UllL(SS O!H(R'MS( SIATtO.
1. J.I.1. POST SPACING SH.lU 6E 2.Om (XC(PT !HAl ~ ll« T(/l1,I'J.",.
)
S(CTlOH OR u:.tCSS 01li(R'~ SPfOflED.
!H( POST SH.lU B( ANOlOR([) 10 GR!oOC 201<JJ WIC. 1l.OO< IN ll« CROUfIO
or SlZ( 81Snun , .0Qm<n Ol.\.
'. IlAltR'A!. SPfcn:ATlON SHAU FOLlOWS !H( ~, 1(Km< (..........) 1/85.
S IH( ~rLD ~ro' Ol£ C"""'(l S(CllOH ,,~ !lAS( PlAI(

",
II« OS( or
o· ~ GU.\R1JAA'L rOR ROCK FOUNDAn&l S>W.L B( CAARI(O O\!r
"""
I""
I
0 I
II
iN ll« FACIORY 1lEr0Rr WVol.'ilSIlC.
I 1
I " 6 TII( STIll POST SHIU Hl.VC • 1m. ~ !lOll HOt(S llimm O'A
THIS rs TO ExS\JR( nlAl POST CJ,.' 6( ORl(NI(lJ ,~ ll« OlR[COOtI ~ lRAmC flOW
I'
" "
I
", ) 8£AU TO 6( (R[CllO ON A RADI\JS or LCSS n...~ 450> S1v.u 8{ SHOP CUIMO
lllOOO IT II TO II« APf'!lOPIlIAll CUNAluRl: or fli( .61AlUn&:.
"""" • .,..
10
"
8 IH( ClJ_ SH.lU ONLY OC SUPPlJ(O BY 'CCR(OO(O ISO 9002 5uPPLJ(R /.1.1) SHAU
~ • S!RlCKLY 6( SUMCrro 10 CWJSl: 61.5 or Jl(R STIJIQJJlO SPf0f)CA1J()N (Jl<RlsPJ/1938)
rOR !H( ACCCPTANC( ol.~O INSIAlUllO<l
o·
I
" I
.
", 9. t.l.L SI[CL PMIS. h'lllS /.110 IlOLT wASH(RS TO B( CAlv....'5(O AS PrR "S. 7.0
10. TIl( 1(RI,IINA!. UNIl (01'( 1) AND fli( 9CT T'Ir.SI (M'( )) 010 IR£Al\IfOfT SHAll OC
U$(O ONLY OH TIl[ OCPARruR£ 5«.
II. /oll POSrs 5HAU NOT B( ANCIIORI:O 10 COlIC. 1lLOO< IN lH( CROUHO UNless OIH(ll'OlS( SP(On(O
~
'X-= ":~~ C(KX., '2. !H( ClJJIlRAlL SHAU B( POSinwo NOI "OR[ TWj< lSOmm OR NOI L[SS OW< J.Om !ROIl FAC(
\'~
CURVE GUARDRAIL DAT6
," ~f1f../rITKrKX.COH\u
OF K(R9 AS SP(Clfl(O BY 11« S.O ( R[l[R ROAD K(Rll {)(lIJL DAAWiNC )
• CU8£DOCO L(NClll or ORlW< - SI(£l POST ""HOUT COtICR(l( SURIlOUIiO.
.
\-1l.L\ I' I
,,
. AIL OF ''u'' BOLT
)CK FOUNDATIOlj
GUARDR~L ON CURVES
~_G_U_A_R_D_R_A_' L_D__E_T_A_'L_S_W_IT_H_S_T_E ~_~_PO_~T_ _ J
DRAFT
6MRC AUG.2004
6.0 WIRE ROPE SAFETY FENCE
6.1 INTRODUCTION
Wire Rope Safety Barriers (WRSBs) are flexible type of longitudinal traffic barrier
which utilises the energy management principle. It absorbs the dynamic impacting
kinetic energy through the posts, anchors and the pre-tensioned wire ropes whereby
the posts are designed to collapse progressively on impact. It guides the collided
vehicle forward away from the line of traffic as it deflects, rather than deflected it
back into the flow of traffic, with potentially lethal consequences. The post in
conjunction with the wire ropes is designed to prevent crossovers. WRSBs keep
vehicles damage to a minimum and reduce the risk of serious personal injury. Upon
impact, WRSBs deflect more than other barrier types, resulting in relatively less
vehicle damage and occupant injury. WRSBs are more forgiving to vehicle occupants
when performing their function of containing and redirecting vehicles which have left
the roadway, or travel lane in the case of median application.
6.2 GENERAL DESCRIPTION
The barrier consists of three or four tensioned galvanised steel wire ropes supported
by galvanised steel posts at nominally 2.4 or 3.2 meter centres. The two (or one)
upper ropes are located in a slot in the top of the posts and the two lower ropes are
normally interwoven along the barrier between each pair of posts to control deflection
and prevent crossovers. The ropes are joined and tensioned by means of rigging
screws. The ends of the ropes are attached to anchors embedded in the ground or to
surface mounted anchors (see Appendix 6A for General Arrangements).
Currently there are 2 wire rope safety barrier systems used in Malaysia, Plate-l and
Plate-2 show the 2 types.
71
DRAFT
6MRC AUG.2004
Plate 6.1: 4 wire rope system using double curve shaped posts
Plate 6.2: 4 wire rope system using circular posts
72
DRAFT
6MRC AUG.2004
6.3 WIRE ROPE SAFETY FENCE COMPONENTS
The components of the system consist of the galvanised mild steel posts, galvanised
pre-tensioned steel wire ropes and anchors. The design and dimensions differ
.between different propriety products. The system shall be crash-tested to NCHRP 350
Test Level 3 (TL-3) or other internationally recognised tests procedures and criteria.
The main requirements for this test are:
a) OIV (Occupant Impact Velocity) - 12 m1s (43.2 kph) max.
b) ORA (occupant Ridedown Acceleration) 20g max.
i) Height of Post
The ropes and post heights are based on the height of the strongest part of the average
vehicle.
The height of the post varies between 690mm to 71 Omm from the ground with upper
ropes at 600mm ± 10mm and lower interwoven ropes at 500mm ± 10mm from the
ground. The post is embedded 400mm into concrete foundation of 950mm (see
Appendix 6B).
ii) Post spacing
The post spacing are commonly used are 2.4 meters and 302m. For standardization
purposes, it is proposed that the 4 Wire Rope with 2.4m post spacing be used for the
installation of Wire Rope in Malaysia. But, at locations where there is a need to
reduce the deflection, the post can be installed closer. The minimum post spacing is
1.Om.
73
DRAFT
6MRC AUG.2004
Some of the results of the test carried out on a 4 wire rope system with different posts
spacing, anchor spacing, vehicle mass and speed are shown below in Table 6.1.
Anchor Post Vehicle Impact Measured

Speed Angle
Spacing. Spacing Mass . Severity .Deflection
(kph)· (deg)
(m) (m) (kg) (kJ). (m)
1. 319.2 1.0 753 113 20 43.4 0.86
2. 100.8 3.2 875 104 19 38.3 1.00
3. 103.2 2.4 1260 83 30 83.7 1.20
4. 319.2 1.0 1480 115 20 88.3 1.00
5. 100.8 3.2 1492 111 19 75.6 1.40
6. 626.4 2.4 1500 113 20 86.4 1.70
7. 106.1 3.2 1505 115 20 90.0 1.73
8. 192.0 2.4 2010 102 25 144.1 1.65
Table 6.1: Some Results for Deflections of Crash Tested Wire Rope Safety
Barriers
As seen in the Table 6.1 above, although there are so many variances the general
result is that close post spacing reduces deflection. The minimum effective length of
the barrier is 24 meter. But when the wire rope is installed in front of an obstruction,
the full height fence should be installed in accordance to Chapter 3.2 for minimum
Length-of Need.
iii) Shape of Post
Currently, there are two shapes of posts being used in the installation of Wire Rope
Safety Barrier in Malaysia, the double curve shaped posts (i.e. "s" or "Z") and the
round hollow shape posts.
74
DRAFT
6MRC AUG.2004
The double curve shaped posts (i.e. "s" or "Z") with the flange at right angle to the
direction of traffic have the weak plane on one direction and thus the posts would
collapse forward uniformly in one direction when hit. The post is formed from 6mm
thick mild steel. The round hollow shape has no specific direction of the weak plane
and hence the direction of collapse of the posts when hit is not uniform.
Generally, there are two types of post in the installation namely Line Post and
Deflection post. The Line Posts are installed at the intermittent section with roller to
support the two lower ropes and the deflection posts are installed at the end anchor
block section with wire rope hang welded to the posts to support the two lower ropes.
(Refer to Appendix 6C)
iv) Interwoven type of wire rope
From crash tests conducted, the interwoven ropes assist to keep the posts upright, to
reduce the number of posts to be damaged and thus reducing the catenary of the wire
rope.
The wire ropes are to be 19mm diagram 3 x 7 construction galvanised with minimum
breaking load of 17.7 tonnes unfitted and 16.7 tonnes fitted. Minimum Modulus of
Elasticity should be 8300 kg/mm 2 on an area of 283 mm 2 after pre-stressing.
It should be galvanised pre-tensioned so that there is negligible extension when the

rope is under tension when holding back errant vehicles. It shall comply with the
Department of Transport UK, Departmental Standard TD 32.
v) Anchor
The length of wire rope between anchors shall be not more than 627m. The detail of
the end anchor is shown in Appendix 6A.
75
DRAFT
6MRC AUG.2004
vi) Intermediate Anchors
For lengths of wire rope exceeding 627m, intermediate anchors are to be used. The
minimum distance between intermediate anchors is 30m. The detail of the end anchor
is shown in Appendix 6A.
6.4 CONSIDERATION FOR WIRE ROPE SAFETY BARRIER

INSTALLATION
Wire rope safety fences shall not be used:
a) where the length of fence at full height would be less than 24m;
b) on horizontal curves of radius less than 200m;
c) on vertical sag curves of radius less than 3,OOOm;
d) on central reserves having a width of less than:
(i) 3.2m when the support posts are at 204m centres
(ii) 2.75m when the support posts are at 1.2m centres
(iii) 205m when the support posts are at 1.0m centres
e) where the height of any kerb at the edge of the adjacent paved surface exceeds
110mm and the traffic face of the wire rope safety fence would be positioned less
than 1.5m from the kerb face;
In addition, a wire rope safety fence shall not be connected directly to other safety
barrier of different rigidity such as concrete barrier and bridge parapet. However, the
wire rope safety fence can be interfaced with semi-rigid type of safety barrier such as
W-beam guardrail when installed in accordance with the details shown on Appendix
6D
76
DRAFT
6MRC AUG.2004
6.5 LOCATIONS FOR INSTALLATION OF WIRE ROPE SAFETY

BARRIER
a) Median Barrier
Wire Rope Safety Barrier can be considered as one of the option for
longitudinal barrier used at wide median where barrier is warranted (Refer to
Figure 2.6: of Median Barrier Study Warrants). Wire Rope Safety Barrier with
smaller posts spacing can be used in narrow median to prevent vehicles
crossing over the median. It is not recommended for median width less than
2.5m.
b) Roadside Barrier
Wire Rope Safety Barrier installation by the roadside should have minimum
clearance not less than:
(i) 1.5m when the support posts are at 204m centres.
(ii) 1.3m when the support posts are at 12m centres.
(iii) 1.1m when the support posts are at 1.0m centres.
c) Emergency Crossing
Wire Rope Safety Barrier, due to its ease of dismantling and reinstalling, is
suitable to be installed at designated median emergency crossing. Wire Rope
Safety Barrier acts as a traffic safety barrier when the crossing is not in use.
6.6 MAINTENANCE AND REPAIR
Generally Wire Rope Safety Barrier does not require a lot of maintenance. After
collision, only the bent posts need to be replaced. The slotted method is preferred for
ease and quick repairs. The pre-tensioned ropes, which are also tensioned during
installation as a system, need not be re-tensioned after collision.
77
DRAFT
6MRC AUG.2004
6.7 RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended to adopt only the 4 wire rope system with maximum post spacing
of2.4m to be used on Malaysia roads. It shall not be used in median which is less than
2.5m wide.
In addition, no wire rope system shall be used when the horizontal curve is less than
200m and also when the vertical sag curve of radius is less than 3000m.
78
DRAFT
6MRC AUG.2004
6.8 APPENDIX
6.8.1 Appendix 6A
~+-,7U!ilQ9y!-",2lQ9~f-l!!1Q..--l-~.L1lf!lL.l-L4QL.~-l~--\-1m-W!iLW~-+-~2!(IIW-Q!---'l2jQQiI!!L...I
I I I I I I I I I
Iii I I iii i i
LIIIlCI«:
--1-=
-lJt[ POST SCl9 AI lWt flOm JlTUrliI. (TlllSlaK)
-=-- -- ----:z; =-- =

I L!!!!~lOO.!!O.."~:,...,..,.,,.f::,--,~-~--.JI:r---,I',---J7:,Ii6-
..... .... r-.,u,---."r-, ...., .':.
SECTION
WI 2lQ9 2400 2lQ9

!-~ 2lQ9 2100 2lQ9 7400 2400 :ll!L~1OO 2m 2lQ9 2!OO mQ WI
I I !
i I I
Wire Rope Safety Barrier General Arrangement
/M~UPPER ROPES
ROPE DIA 19mm LOWER ROPES~ ~ ( r\/~

'-
585mm
~,
I DP
679mm DP
GROUND
LP
~
r-p; ....
l000mm
~
~ ~
~ END
ANCHOR
BLOCKS
POST
FOUNDATIONS
950mm
v:
LEVEL
//
T
~ ~ c:~ -~
V'
"L :c:
~Ir-
1220rnm , 0350mm (MIN)
• •
I...•--2~4-;;;oo;-:m=m:-----·.j..!·o----;2:::400=mm=---1·If.·----=2-:-:400c::-m-m- - - · ,...•---=-240C=-Om-m---' i
(LP - LINE POST)
~ lo,-omECTION""'"
t--;~~;r~~~~====*=iD==---==~
i
::L: __ =
SAFETY CHECK
ROPES
[ = _OJ:
SCHEMATIC ARRANGEMENT OF INTERWEAVING OF TWO LOWER ROPES
End Anchor Arrangement
79
DRAFT
6MRC AUG.2004
1--~2~40~0_1----,-.--=2....:....::.40.=.-0_I
I.
I
.I
I
I INTERMEDIATE A CHOR SE~TION I
I
I I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I I·: I
19mm~ WIRE ROPES ·C TENSlONER TO DETAIL
V !7 Lm:R WIRE lOO.

illitA ii1R£ 1M(
!7 CROUHO lOO.
DP DP
I" , I I' ., J
'. . I I. I
I I I I
I' • I I' • I
I .. , I .f
I
I
~
I
-I'
. L ~
,.
I
~
',.
'4
I
Intermediate Anchor Arrangement
80
DRAFT
6MRC AUG.2004
6.8.2 Appendix 6B
E
E E
o E
~
E o
~
+1
o E +1
o o
~ o
CD o
+1 r-
o
oII)
1
1
1
E
E1
81
''It'l
1
1
E
E
o
II)
en
{3350mm
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ J
General Arrangement of Ropes and Post
81
DRAFT
6MRC AUG.2004
6.8.3 Appendix 6C
Line Post (Isometric View)
61"'l1"'l THICK G.I. \JIRE ROPE HANG
Deflection Post (Isometric View)
82
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _1
0\
00
~
>
"'0
"'0
n>
=
_.
0.
~
0\
~
W-BEAM GUARDRAIL
WIRE ROPE BARRIER (2.4M POST SPACING)
12.0M MINIMUM OVERLAP
.BRIDGE ..
PARAPET WALL
I' "I
/CONCRETE BARRIER
00
(;,)
WIRE ROPE BARRIER {1.0M PDST SPACING)

.....
O'J
~c
0:0
E: »
Gl"
~~
o
.j:>
DRAFT
6MRC AUG.2004
7.0 REFERENCES
1. Arahan Teknik (Jalan) 1/85, Manual on Design Guidelines of Longitudinal

Traffic Barrier, JKR.
2. Arahan Teknik (Jalan) 8/86 A Guide on Geometric Design of Roads,
Cawangan Jalan, Jabatan Kerja 'Raya Malaysia, Third Edition, JKR 1993.
3. Review of Wire Rope Safety Barriers Working Party Report: Australian
Transport Safety Bureau, June 2000.
4. Bowman B., "Design, Construction and Maintenance of Highway Safety
Features and Appurtenances". American Association of State Highway and
Transportation Officials (AASHTO), 1997.
5. British Standards B.S. 6779 : Part I - Parapets for Vehicles containment on
Highways.
6. Traffic Manual Chapter 7, Traffic Safety Systems, California Department of
Transportation.
7. Comite Europeen De Normalisation (CEN) - European Standard TB 11 and
TB13.
8. Design manual for Roads and Bridges, Vol. 2, Section 2, Part 3, TO 32/93,
Wire Rope Safety Fence, Department of Transport U.K..
9. Design manual for Roads and Bridges, Vol. 2, Section 2, TO 19/85
(Amendment No.1), Safety Fences and Barrier, Department of Transport U.K..
10. F-Shape Barrier Standard Plans, Colorado Department of Transportation,
www.dot.state.co.us/business/design!standards/mstandards/.
11. Highway Engineering Handbook (Second Edition) 2003, Mcgraw Hills.

12. TNZ Ml23 Notes: 2002, Notes on The Specification for Road Safety Barrier
Systems, Transit New Zealand.
13. Roadway Design Manual, Texas Department of Transportation, Revised
February 2004.
14. Road Design Manual (Metric), Chapter 10.7.0 Traffic Barriers, Minnesota
Department of Transportation
15. Road Planning and Design Manual, Safety Barriers and Roadside Furniture,
Chapter 8, Queensland Department of Main Roads, Australia, 1999.
16. NCHRP Report 350 - Recommended Procedures for the Safety Performance
Evaluation of Highway Features, National Co-operative Highway Research
84
DRAFT
6MRC AUG.2004
Program, U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal highway

Administration.
17. Public Roads Magazine (Vol. 63· No.5), Basics of Concrete Barriers by
Charles F. McDevitt, March-April 2000.
18. Roads and Traffic Authority, New South Wales, Australia, "Road Design
Guide- May 1996".
19. Roadside Manual, M 25-30, Washington Department of Transportation, July
2003.
20. Wire rope safety barrier crash test, Roads & Traffic Authority (Australia),
Road Environment Safety Update 24 Issued March 2004.
21. Safety Barriers - Considerations for the Safety Barriers on Rural Roads,
National Association of Australian State Road Authorities, 1987.
22. Safety Barriers for Roads and Bridges, Roads and Traffic Authority New
South Wales, Australia, 1996.
23. State Highway Design Geometric Manual, Transit New Zealand.
24. Task Force for Roadside Safety, 'Roadside Design Guide - 1996". American
Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO).
25. Troutbeck R. J., "Background to Proposed NAASRA Guidelines for the

Provision of Safety Barrier". Australian Road Research Board Internal
Report 833-1. ARTRB Victoria (Ref 625.738/ARRB.4).
85
DRAFT
6MRC AUG.2004
General Summary Table for Longitudinal Barriers Installation

Characteristics Typt Ttst JKR Post Inneetion Mt'dian Width Min. Min. Remarks
Ltvtl Grometric5 Spacing (orr..t from Radius (Vtrt;c.l)
Standard obstruction) fHol'"izontal
Flexible TL-J ~R41U4 2.4m Approx. 1.7m JAm min. 200m JOOOm Shall not bt
(Sag) connected
~l
directly to rigid
TL-J ~R41U4 l.Om Approx I.Om 2.5m min. 200m JOOOm type of safety
(Sag) barrier
Wire RODe Roadside/median barriers

Semi TL-J ~R41U4 20m Approx. t .Om 2.5m min. Nil Nil
43
rigid
TL-2 RJIUJ & 4.0m Approx. 1.2m 25m min NIl Nil
Below
U
W·beam roadside barrier
fl
Semi· TL-J ~R41U4 2.0m Approx.O.6m <25m Nil Nil To replace
rigid double beam
guardrail
Thrie-beam roadside barrier

:':;<.:1111 TL-4 ~R4/U4 2.Om Approx a 9m <2.5m Nil Nil To replace
~J
rigid double beam
Approx O.Sm guardrail
(TL-J)
TI
Modified Thrie-beam roadside barrier
Semi TL-J ~R41U4 2.0m Approx. O.6m 2.5m min. Nil Nil
rigid
~j
TI
W-beam median barrier
Semi TL-4 ~41U4 20m Approx O.Sm <2.Sm Nil Nil
rigid
~J
TI
Modified Thrie-beam median barrier
l~
Rigid TL-4 ~R4!U4 N/A Nil <2.Sm Nil Nil Care should be
taken to avoid
(Max. olf'et (Max.olTset large angle
from travel edge from [ravel edge impact on sharp
\:'
shall be l.Om) shall be l.Om) curve
F810
rli Rigid TL-S ~R41U4

(to bt
N/A Nil <2.Sm Nil Nil Care should be
taken to avoid
\'~'
considered (Max. olfset (Max.olTset large angle
when from travel edge from travel edge impact on sharp
Htavy shall be I.Om) shall be I.Om) curve
vehicle % is
)
high)
FI070
86

REAM Crash Barriers PDF

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

REAM Crash Barriers PDF

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Sixth Malaysian Road Conference

16-18 August 2004

I The Future of Roads in National Economy I

JABATAN KERJA RAYA

INSTITUTION OF INSTITUTION OF HIGHWAYS AND

ENGINEERS MALAYSIA TRANSPORTATION (MALAYSIAN BRANCH)

2.0 GENERAL DESIGN CONSIDERATIONS

2.2 BARRIER TYPES

2.2.1 Rigid Barriers

2.2.2 Semi-Rigid Barriers

2.2.3 Flexible Barriers

2.3 PERFORMANCE REQUIREMENTS

2.4 CLEAR ZONE CONCEPT

2.4.1 Primary Considerations

2.5 SAFETY BARRIERS WARRANTS

2.5.1 Embankment Safety Barriers

2.5.2 Safety Barrier at Fixed Objects

2.5.3 Median Safety Barrier

3.0 SAFETY BARRIER SELECTION GUIDELINES & LAYOUT

3.1 SELECTION GUIDELINES

3.1.1 Barrier Performance Capability

3.1.2 Barrier Deflection Characteristics

3.1.3 Site Conditions

3.1.5 Life Cycle Costs

3.1.7 Aesthetic and Environmental Considerations

3.1.8 Field Experience

3.2 SAFETY BARRIERS LOCATION AND LAYOUT

3.2.1 Roadside Safety Barrier Systems Elements

3.2.2 Layouts and Location

3.2.3 Median Safety Barriers

3.3 OTHER CONSIDERATIONS

3.3.1 Combination of Safety Barrier Systems

4.0 CONCRETE BARRIERS

4.2 CONCRETE BARRIERS DESCRIPTION AND BEHAVIOR

4.2.1 Design Parameters of Multi Slopes Barriers

4.3 CONCRETE BARRIERS SELECTION

5.0 W-BEAM GUARDRAIL

5.1.2 Safety Performance of W-Beam Guardrail

5.2 BLOCKED-OUT STEEL W-BEAM GUARDRAIL

5.2.1 Description and Behavior under Impact

5.2.2 Guardrail Height

5.2.3 Location on Road Cross-section

5.2.4 Lateral Offset

5.3.1 Installation Length

5.3.2 Transitions to Rigid Objects

(Transition to Bridge Railings)

5.3.3 Installation of W-Beam Guardrail in Vicinity of Concrete

5.4 TERMINAL SECTIONS

5.4.1 Flared Terminals

5.4.2 Ramped Terminals

5.4.3 Straight Extensions

5.4.4 Terminals Treatment

5.4.5 Breakaway Terminals

5.5 MODIFIED BLOCK OUT STEEL THRIE BEAM

6.0 WIRE ROPE SAFETY FENCE

6.2 GENERAL DESCRIPTION

6.3 WIRE ROPE SAFETY FENCE COMPONENTS

6.4 CONSIDERATION FOR WIRE ROPE SAFETY BARRIER

6.5 LOCATIONS FOR INSTALLATION OF WIRE ROPE SAFETY

6.6 MAINTENANCE AND REPAIR

a) Concrete Barrier (Chapter-4)

2.0 GENERAL DESIGN CONSIDERATIONS