Enclosure A

MAX-TensionTM System
Configurations Justification

MAX-Tension Guardrail Terminal System Summary ........................................................................ 2

System Component Summary Diagram............................................................................................ 3

Certification Test Modification and Variation Summary.................................................................. 4

Decal and Marking Application ........................................................................................................ 5

Powder Coating, Painting and Staining ............................................................................................ 7

Delineation Mounting Options ........................................................................................................ 9

Stamped vs. Welded Traffic Side Slider Brackets ........................................................................... 11

Blockout Variations..........................................................................................................................12

25’ and 12.5’ Rail Interchangeability...............................................................................................13

1500A Vehicle Mathematical Simulation (Test 3.38 Supplemental) ............................................. 15

8.5 lb/ft vs. 9 lb/ft Line Post Dynamic Properties........................................................................... 23

Soil Anchor Modification.................................................................................................................30

1
 MAX-TensionTM System Summary
The MAX-TensionTM Guardrail Terminal System (MAX) is an end terminal for corrugated W-beam
barrier systems in tangent configurations. The MAX system utilizes tensioned cables, telescoping
panels, and a cutting tooth to absorb the kinetic energy and safely contain or redirect impacting
vehicles. The system is comprised of a friction based energy absorbing impact head, two tension
cables, a releasable post 1, a ground anchor, and an energy absorbing coupler with integrated cutting
tooth used in conjunction with standard 12 Gauge guardrail panels, posts, blockouts, and hardware.
The panels and post spacing are configured as mid-span splices. The system has a 31 inch rail height.

During frontal impacts, the vehicle engages the impact head and strokes approximately 25 ft of
guardrail panel rearward. The system absorbs the kinetic energy as the impact head applies frictional
forces to the cables which are anchored to the ground upstream of the impact. The tooth within the
coupler cuts a slot in the downstream panels, providing additional energy absorbing capacity and
effectively reducing the strength of the downstream rail. The telescoping rail connection to the posts
and blockouts is released as the bolt heads pull through the rail slots. The coupler acts to detach the
downstream rail connection to the posts and blockouts as the panels telescope rearward.

Impacts to the side of the system at or beyond the length of need are contained and redirected. The
system reacts the lateral impact through resistance of the posts and the tension capacity of the rail
and cable system. The tension of the rail is maintained through the coupler and supported by the
tension cables and secured by the ground anchor.

MAX System Key Components Diagram illustrates the system and identifies components referenced
throughout this report.

2
 MAX System Key Components Diagram
BARRIER SYSTEMS
180 River Road
Rio Vista, CA 94571
Tel: 888-800-3691
www.barriersystemsinc.com

Friction Cables Traffic Side Slider

(TSS)
Cutting Tooth
(Sabertooth™)

Inside Slider
Friction Bar (ISS)
First Post
Rear Side Slider
Ground Strut (RSS)
Impact Head
Soil Anchor

DETAIL B
SCALE 1 : 8

Delineation Mounting
Bracket

DETAIL A
SCALE 1 : 8
 Certification Test Modification and Variation Summary
Listed in the Table 1 below is the summary of MAX modifications and variations made during testing:

STI Test Number MASH Test decription System Summary Comments

▪ Composite blockouts
MET015 3-31: 2270P/100kph/0° ▪ 1/4" thicknes Ground Strut Pass
▪ Cable Guard chamfer out of spec
▪ Composite blockouts
MET161203 3-32: 1100C/100kph/5° Pass
▪ 1/4" thicknes Ground Strut
▪ Composite blockouts
MET161206 3-33: 2270P/100kph/5° Pass
▪ 1/4" thicknes Ground Strut
▪ Composite blockouts
MET161212 3-35: 2270P/100kph/25° BLON Pass
▪ 3/8" thickness Ground strut
▪ Wood blockouts
MET161220 3-37: 2270P/100kph/25° CIP Reverse ▪ 3/8" thickness Ground strut Pass
▪ Rectangular washer added to first post over a Grade 5 Bolt
▪ Wood blockouts
MET161228 3-30: 1100C/100kph/0° W/4 ▪ 3/8" thickness Ground strut Pass
▪ Rectangular washer added to first post over a Grade 5 Bolt
▪ Wood blockouts
MET161229 3-34: 1100C/100kph/15° CIP ▪ 1/4" thickness Ground strut Pass
▪ Rectangular washer added to first post over a Grade 5 Bolt
▪ Composite blockouts
MET170105 3-31: 2270P/100kph/0° ▪ 3/8" thickness Ground strut Pass, No video
▪ Rectangular washer added to first post over a Grade 5 Bolt

Table 1: Test Modifications and Variations

4
Decal and Marking Application
The primary energy absorbing components of the MAX-Tension Guardrail Terminal System (MAX)
are the cable assemblies, impact head guide rings and friction bar, and the cutting tooth, which
interacts only with the downstream 25’ of guardrail. Adhesive decals, ID tags and markings may be
applied to non-interacting, external surfaces without adversely affecting system function or
performance. The structural capacity of the MAX system is not affected by the inclusion of ID tags,
decals, or other non-abrasive markings. Areas for ID tag placement are shown in drawing
"Non-Critical, External, Surfaces." These locations, decal size, and content may be changed
depending on production requirements and federal, state, and local requirements. A sample
product identifications decal is also shown below in Figure 1.

Figure 1: Sample product identification decal on impact head

Furthermore, identification or tracking codes may be stamped into components. Stamping locations
and dimensions will be identified to ensure no compromise to the structural capacity, function, or
performance of the MAX system.

5
 Non-Critical, External, Surfaces
BARRIER SYSTEMS
180 River Road
Rio Vista, CA 94571
Tel: 888-800-3691
www.barriersystemsinc.com

DETAIL A DETAIL B DETAIL C DETAIL D

SCALE 1 : 16 SCALE 1 : 16 SCALE 1 : 16 SCALE 1 : 16
Powder Coating, Painting or Staining
All components of the MAX-Tension Guardrail Terminal System (MAX) that do not affect energy
absorbing capacity may be powder coated, painted or stained without adversely affecting the
function or performance of the system. Energy-absorbing elements, and respective critical
hardware, have been designated on the attached drawing, Powder Coating Painting and Staining,
as bright red. These elements include the cable assemblies, impact head guide rings and friction
bar, and the cutting tooth, with impact head welded nuts, and friction bar anchoring bolts as
critical hardware.

All non energy-absorbing components, illustrated in phantom light gray, may use alternative
coatings such as powder coat, stain or paint in addition to, or in place of, hot dipped galvanizing.
Core 10 or equivalent materials should not be used with the MAX-Tension Guardrail Terminal
System.

7
 Powder Coating, Painting or Staining
BARRIER SYSTEMS
180 River Road
Rio Vista, CA 94571
Tel: 888-800-3691
www.barriersystemsinc.com

DETAIL A DETAIL B DETAIL C

SCALE 1 : 12 SCALE 1 : 12 SCALE 1 : 12
Delineation And Mounting Bracket Options
The MAX-Tension Guardrail Terminal System has been tested to the MASH standard using a 24
gauge delineation mounting bracket with an adhesive delineation marker affixed to its’ front.
Optional configurations of the delineation bracket may be used if desired so long as the
following criteria are met:

1) The new bracket shall be made from 24 gauge coated steel or aluminum of a gauge with
equivalent yield properties of 24 gauge coated steel. Alternately, a lightweight nose cover
made of HDPE or similar polymer can be used as a surface for delineation.
2) A variety of delineation patterns, decals, and tape options may be used on the provided
mounting bracket. Delineator specifications will be in accordance with Federal, State and local
requirements. Delineation patterns or decal/tape consistency has no effect on the function,
capacity, or performance of the system.
3) Some regions may require different delineation mounting brackets. Alternative brackets are
identified in the drawing, BSI-1701064-BRACKETS. The system will function properly with any
of the proposed brackets of similar materials and structural composition. This is due to the
nature of the alternate delineation and mounting brackets as non-structural, thin walled,
components.

Sample delineation brackets follow on the next page.

9
 8

"HALF-ROUND" ALTERNATIVE OPTION "FRONT POST+ PLATE" ALTERNATIVE OPTION

D D

LOW PROFILE STRUT CHANNEL CAN BE

USED TO FASTEN A DELINEATION PLATE.
CONTACT LINDSAY TRANSPORTATION
SOLUTIONS FOR RECOMMENDED SIZE
AND INSTALLATION HARDWARE.

C C

IF REQUESTED, THE DELINEATION BRACKET SHOWN AND

MOUNTING HARDWARE CAN BE PROVIDED BY LINDSAY
TRANSPORTATION SOLUTIONS. THE DELINEATION MARKER
SHOULD BE IN ACCORDANCE WITH FEDERAL, LOCAL AND STATE
REGULATIONS. MARKER IS NOT PROVIDED BY LINDSAY
TRANSPORTATIONS SOLUTIONS.
THE ALTERNATE DELINEATION BRACKET SHOWN SHALL BE
FABRICATED USING 24 Ga GALVANIZED STEEL, OR EQUIVALENT
MATERIAL HAVING SIMILAR MATERIAL PROPERTIES. SHAPE SHALL THE DELINEATION COMPONENTS SHOWN SHALL NOT INTERFERE
NOT INTERFERE WITH THE CABLES AND IT SHALL NOT INTERFERE WITH THE PERFORMANCE OF THE SYSTEM.
WITH THE PERFORMANCE OF THE SYSTEM.

"TAPERED" ALTERNATIVE OPTION "FULL ROUND" ALTERNATIVE OPTION

6X 1/4-20 410 SS HEX HEAD DRILLING

6X 1/4-20 410 SS HEX HEAD DRILLING SCREWS REQUIRED TO SECURE THE
SCREWS REQUIRED TO SECURE THE DELINEATION BRACKET TO THE HEAD
DELINEATION BRACKET TO THE HEAD OF THE SYSTEM.
OF THE SYSTEM.

A A

THE ALTERNATE DELINEATION BRACKET SHOWN SHALL BE
FABRICATED USING 24 Ga GALVANIZED STEEL, OR EQUIVALENT
MATERIAL HAVING SIMILAR MATERIAL PROPERTIES. SHAPE SHALL
NOT INTERFERE WITH THE CABLES AND IT SHALL NOT INTERFERE
WITH THE PERFORMANCE OF THE SYSTEM.
THE ALTERNATE DELINEATION BRACKET SHOWN SHALL BE
FABRICATED USING 24 Ga GALVANIZED STEEL, OR EQUIVALENT
MATERIAL HAVING SIMILAR MATERIAL PROPERTIES. SHAPE SHALL
NOT INTERFERE WITH THE CABLES AND IT SHALL NOT INTERFERE
WITH THE PERFORMANCE OF THE SYSTEM.

Doc. B10011Cll
 Stamped vs. Welded Traffic Side Slider Brackets
The MAX-Tension Guardrail Terminal System was tested to MASH using a welded Traffic Side Slider
assembly. From material strength calculations, it has been determined that a stamped or formed Traffic
Side Slider assembly would have equal to, or greater strength than, a welded assembly of equivalent
base material properties. This is due to the increased yield strength of strain hardened steel. As this
component acts to redirect and contain, this additional rigidity will have a neutral to positive effect on
system performance. The formed version will maintain dimensional consistency with the tested version.

The expected strain for the formed feature using 10 gage A36 steel with an inside bend radius of 3/8” to
11° would be 0.15 in/in, using calculations below. Using the stress-strain characteristic curve from ASM
International’s Atlas of Stress-strain Curves, the work hardening would result in an increase in yield
strength from 37 ksi up to approximately 57 ksi. While this example uses base-strength A36 material,
the analysis will hold for variation in strength between carbon steel varieties, with initially stronger
steel showing similar strain hardening effects.
11° = 0.192 𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟
𝑆𝑆1 = 0.5095𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖 ∙ 0.192 𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟 = 0.0978𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖
𝑆𝑆2 = 0.4423𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖 ∙ 0.192 𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟 = 0.0849𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖
∆𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙ℎ 𝑆𝑆1 − 𝑆𝑆2
𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠 = = = 0.1519 𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖�𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖
𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙ℎ𝑜𝑜 𝑆𝑆2

Figure 2: Method of determining strain

≈57 ksi

Tensile
strength
after strain
hardening

Figure 3: Stress strain curve of A36 steel, noting strain hardening

result. Excerpt from Atlas of Stress-strain curves, ASM International

11
 8" and 12" Wood and Composite Blockouts
8" or 12" composite or wood blockouts may be used with the MAX-Tension Guardrail Terminal
System (MAX). The system demonstrated acceptable performance using composite or wood
blockouts in both frontal and side impacts. For certification tests MET015, MET170105, MET16103,
MET1161206, MET161212, and MET161229, 8” composite blockouts were used. For tests
MET161220 and MET161228, 8” wood blockouts were used.

During frontal impacts, the connection to post, blockout, and rail must release to permit telescoping
of the panels rearward and subsequent yielding of the posts. The connection is released through the
pivoting of the blockouts relative to the post and rail faces as the panels move rearward. The rotation
of the blockout pulls the head of the bolt through the slot in the panel. As the panels telescope
rearward, the slider assembly forcibly rotates the blockouts on the downstream panels, releasing the
post, blockout, rail connection by pulling the head of the bolt through the slot in the panels. A 12"
blockout will provide a longer moment arm than the 8" blockout as the blockout rotates and releases
the post and blockout from the rail connection. The longer moment arm will result in a equal or
lower longitudinal force required to initiate the release of the connection. Therefore, 8" blockouts,
as tested, present the highest occupant risk and therefore 8" or 12" blockouts may be incorporated
into the MAX-Tension system in either wood or composite compositions without affecting the
function, capacity or performance of the MAX.

8" or 12" blockouts will perform equivalently in lateral impacts. This is supported by research,
conducted by TTI, on the performance of 8" and 12" blockouts.1

1 Dobrovolny, White, Bligh, Hangul. "Synthesis of Vehicle to System Interaction Similarities and Dissimilarities With
12-Inch Versus 8-Inch Blockout Offset For Use With 31-Inch Mounting Height and Mid-Span Splices.” Texas A&M
Transportation Institute, 2014.

12
25’ and 12.5’ Rails
The MAX-Tension Guardrail Terminal System telescopes guardrail rearward approximately 25' upon
frontal impacts. As the system strokes, an effective 25' segment of w-beam guardrail slides over the
downstream 25' of w-beam guardrail while slicing it longitudinally down the center, or valley, of the w-
beam section. The systems tested to MASH used standard AASHTO M-180 12ga panels of 12.5' length
spliced together to form 25' segments. 25' panels meeting the AASHTO M-180 specification may be
substituted for the 12.5' panels within the MAX system. For frontal impacts, the cutting tooth will not
have to cut through the splice joints when using 25' panels.

For lateral impacts, a continuous panel absent a splice connection provides equivalent or stronger
capacity in tension and bending. This is supported by internal testing which shows that guardrail is
weakest at the splice joint.

From TRAP analysis of test MET015 where D is the theoretical increase in vehicle travel due to the
substitution of a 25' AASHTO M-180 12ga guardrail panel:

𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎 = 9.6𝑔𝑔

𝑚𝑚𝑣𝑣𝑣𝑣ℎ𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖 = 2270 𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘

𝑔𝑔 = 9.81 𝑚𝑚� 2
𝑠𝑠
𝐷𝐷 = 12.6 𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖 = 0.32004 𝑚𝑚

9.81 𝑚𝑚� 2
𝑊𝑊 = 𝐹𝐹 ∙ 𝐷𝐷 = �1.32𝑔𝑔 ∙ 2270 𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘 ∙ 𝑠𝑠 � ∙ (0.32004 𝑚𝑚) = 9.406 𝐾𝐾𝐾𝐾
𝑔𝑔

𝑊𝑊 = 𝐹𝐹 ∙ 𝐷𝐷 = [ (𝑎𝑎 𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎 ∙ 𝑔𝑔) ∙ 𝑚𝑚] ∙ 𝐷𝐷 = (9.6𝑔𝑔) ∙ (9.81 𝑚𝑚� 2 ) ∙ (2207 𝑘𝑘𝑔𝑔) ∙ 𝐷𝐷

𝑠𝑠
𝑫𝑫 = 𝟒𝟒 .

The time and distance values were obtained from the overhead video of the MET015 truck vehicle test.
The overall change in force between single and lapped rail sections is 1.32g effective for a duration of
0.02 seconds and over a distance of 12.6 inches. This translates to a difference in system work of 9.406
kJ. Translated to distance of travel, assuming an average ride-down acceleration of 9.6g, the additional
vehicle travel would be 4.53cm. This is inconsequential as the maximum vehicle travel does not
exceed 24’ of the 25’ system. Therefore, 12.5’ or 25’ panels may be used with the MAX-Tension
System.

For the 1500A Vehicle (Test 3-38 Supplemental) simulation, a lapped joint system was utilized for data
and produced positive results. As the distance of travel of the 1500A vehicle will be less than that of the
2270P vehicle, this validates the worst-case for impact severity.

Note that, for a light car impact under MASH standard conditions, the system does not stroke past
12'6", and therefore does not interact with the lap joint.

13
1500A Vehicle (Test 3.38)
From the AASHTO “Manual for Assessing Safety Hardware Second Edition” Appendix G2, calculation of
theoretical values for a 1500A vehicle crash may be conducted in lieu of crash testing. Utilizing data
from test MET015, a 1500 kg vehicle at 0 deg and 100 kph will have a maximum predicted ride-down
acceleration of 11.5g. This is within the preferred occupant risk limits of MASH, and validates the
waiver of test 3.38 with a 1500A vehicle. Equivalent results were found from analysis of MET170105,
with the more severe impact case being presented.

The TRAP report attached was used to evaluate the occupant risk factors and Figure 4 displays the
longitudinal acceleration derived from the calculated data. Tables 2-3 are sample tables of the
original data used in calculation of the 1500A Occupant Risk Factors. Figures 5-14 are graphical
representations of the values calculated from the 2270P test data.

2 American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials. "Manual for Assessing Safety Hardware
Second Edition." American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials, 2016.

15
Test Summary Report (Using SAE Class 180 Filter on Acceleration Data and Angular Velocity/Displacement Data)

General Information
Test Agency:Lindsay Transportation Solutions
Test Number:N/A
Test Date:01/1
Test Article:MAX-Tension

Test Vehicle
Description:
Test Inertial Mass: 1500 kg
Gross Static Mass: 1500 kg
Impact Conditions
Speed: 100.0 km/h
Angle: 0.0 degrees

Occupant Risk Factors

Impact Velocity (m/s) at 0.1766 seconds on front of interior
x-direction 9.4
y-direction -0.0
THIV (km/hr): 33.8 at 0.1766 seconds on front of interior
THIV (m/s): 9.4

Ridedown Accelerations (g's)

x-direction -11.5 (0.2618 - 0.2718 seconds)
y-direction 0.0 (0.1766 - 0.1866 seconds)
PHD (g's): 11.5 (0.2618 - 0.2718 seconds)

ASI: 1.16 (0.1032 - 0.1532 seconds)

Max. 50msec Moving Avg. Accelerations (g's)

x-direction -13.0 (0.0767 - 0.1267 seconds)
y-direction 0.0 (0.0000 - 0.0500 seconds)
z-direction 0.0 (0.0000 - 0.0500 seconds)
Max Roll, Pitch, and Yaw Angles (degrees)
Roll 0.0 (0.0000 seconds)
Pitch 0.0 (0.0000 seconds)
Yaw 0.0 (0.0000 seconds)

16
 X Acceleration at CG
10
Longitudinal Acceleration (G)

-10

Test Number:
-20 Test Article:
Test Vehicle:
Inertial Mass: 1500 kg
Gross Mass: 1500 kg
Impact Speed: 100 km/h
Impact Angle: 0 degrees
-30
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0
Time (sec)

Time of OIV (0.1766 sec) SAE Class 60 Filter

Figure 4: 1500A System TRAP X-Trace

17
 1500A Justification Mass truck 2269 Mass Sedan 1500 kg
Time Raw SAE Class SAE Class 50 msec 10 msec v 2270P

60 Filter 180 Filter Average Average

(sec) (G's) (G's) (G's) (G's) (G's) (km/h)

0 -0.04516 0.000092 0.000314 99.34

0.0001 -0.02258 0.000456 0.001475 99.34

0.0002 0.07526 0.001165 0.003505 99.34001

0.0003 0.071497 0.002196 0.006042 99.34003

0.0004 0.022578 0.003528 0.008837 99.34006

0.0005 0.052682 0.00514 0.011783 99.34009

0.0006 0.026341 0.007014 0.014891 99.34014

0.0007 -0.04516 0.009132 0.018236 99.3402

0.0008 0.022578 0.011479 0.021895 99.34027

0.0009 0.041393 0.014036 0.025891 99.34035

0.001 0.011289 0.016785 0.030206 99.34045

0.0011 0.048919 0.019711 0.03482 99.34057

0.0012 0.063971 0.022796 0.039718 99.3407

0.0013 0.011289 0.026025 0.044901 99.34085

0.0014 -0.04892 0.029383 0.05036 99.34102

0.0015 0.033867 0.032853 0.055989 99.3412

0.0016 0.131705 0.03642 0.06154 99.34141

0.0017 0.086549 0.040067 0.066713 99.34164

0.0018 0.045156 0.04378 0.071267 99.34188

0.0019 0.11289 0.047545 0.075017 99.34214

0.002 0.120416 0.051352 0.077817 99.34241

0.0021 0.131705 0.055189 0.079593 99.34269

0.0022 0.131705 0.059051 0.080391 99.34297

… … … … … … …

Table 2: Sample of 1500A Justification Raw Data

18
 a sedan 10ms
SAE Class v 2270P Δδ 2270P F test article W test article v sedan t sedan Δv sedan Δδ occ sedan a sedan avg

180 Filter

(m/s^2) (m/s) (m) (N) (J) (m/s) (sec) (m/s) (m) (m/s^2) (m/s^2)

0.00308 27.59447 0 6.989291 0 27.7 0 0 0 0.00466

-0.01447 27.59447 0.002759 -32.8319 -0.03566 27.7 9.96E-05 -8.6E-07 -4.3E-11 -0.02189

-0.03438 27.59447 0.005519 -78.0174 -0.1886 27.7 0.000199 -4.5E-06 -3.1E-10 -0.05201

-0.05927 27.59447 0.008278 -134.488 -0.4818 27.70001 0.000299 -1.2E-05 -1.1E-09 -0.08966
… … … … … … … … … … …

-1.61363 27.59756 0.126939 -3661.32 -193.951 27.70467 0.004582 -0.00467 -7.3E-06 -2.44088

-1.6749 27.59773 0.129699 -3800.35 -204.247 27.70492 0.004682 -0.00492 -7.8E-06 -2.53357

-1.72765 27.5979 0.132459 -3920.04 -214.901 27.70517 0.004782 -0.00517 -8.3E-06 -2.61336

-1.77129 27.59807 0.135219 -4019.07 -225.856 27.70544 0.004881 -0.00544 -8.8E-06 -2.67938

-1.80568 27.59825 0.137979 -4097.08 -237.055 27.7057 0.004981 -0.0057 -9.4E-06 -2.73139

-1.83103 27.59843 0.140738 -4154.6 -248.442 27.70598 0.00508 -0.00598 -9.9E-06 -2.76973 -1.23147

-1.84765 27.59862 0.143498 -4192.33 -259.96 27.70626 0.00518 -0.00626 -1.1E-05 -2.79489 -1.21633

-1.85571 27.5988 0.146258 -4210.6 -271.556 27.70653 0.00528 -0.00653 -1.1E-05 -2.80707 -1.19945

-1.85529 27.59899 0.149018 -4209.65 -283.175 27.70681 0.005379 -0.00681 -1.2E-05 -2.80643 -1.18072

-1.84685 27.59917 0.151778 -4190.5 -294.767 27.70709 0.005479 -0.00709 -1.3E-05 -2.79367 -1.16009

-1.8313 27.59936 0.154538 -4155.22 -306.284 27.70737 0.005579 -0.00737 -1.3E-05 -2.77015 -1.13757
… … … … … … … … … … …

Table 3: Sample of 1500A Justification Analysis

19
 v 2270P (m/s) δ 2270P (m)
30 12
25 10
20 8
15
6
10
4
5
2
0
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 0
0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8
0
Figure 5: Longitudinal velocity of the 2270P vehicle Figure 6: Displacement of the 2270P vehicle

F test article (N) W test article (J)

600000 1000000
500000 900000
800000
400000
700000
300000 600000
200000 500000
100000 400000
0 300000
200000
-100000 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8
100000
-200000 0
-300000 -100000 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8

Figure 7: Force exerted by the test article on the 2270P vehicle Figure 8: Work done by the attenuation system

20
 v sedan (m/s) t sedan (sec)
30 0.45
0.4
25
0.35
20 0.3
0.25
15 0.2
10 0.15
0.1
5 0.05
0
0
-0.05 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8
-5 -0.1

Figure 9: Longitudinal velocity of the 1500 kg sedan vehicle Figure 10: Time interval for 1500 kg sedan vehicle

Δv sedan (m/s) δ occ sedan (m)

35 5
30
4
25
3
20
15 2
10
1
5
0
0
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8
-5 -1

Figure 11: Change in velocity for the 1500 kg sedan vehicle Figure 12: Occupant displacement for the 1500 kg sedan vehicle

21
 a sedan (m/s^2) a sedan 10ms avg (m/s^2)
350 250
300
250 200
200
150
150
100 100
50
0 50
-50 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8
0
-100 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8
-150 -50

Figure 13: Acceleration of the 1500 kg sedan vehicle Figure 14: 10 ms average acceleration of the 1500 kg sedan vehicle

22
8.5lb/ft and 9lb/ft Post
In all tests performed, post 1 is constructed from a 9lb/ft I-beam whereas the other posts in the system
are constructed from 8.5lb/ft I-beam.

For side impacts, stiffer posts would result in great redirective capacity of the system and would
therefore be of no concern in regard to function or performance.

For frontal impact test MET161203, 5o 1100P impact, demonstrates the case in which stiffer posts
would have the greatest effect on the Occupant Impact Velocity. In the bending calculations below, it is
shown that the use of a 9lb/ft post, as compared to an 8.5lb/ft post, requires an additional 14% energy
to collapse in the longitudinal direction. During the 5o impact, the first two panels telescope rearward
and the connection between the post, blockout, and rail release instantly without longitudinal
deformation of the 8.5lb/ft post. Because the 9lb/ft post is stiffer, the result of the rail disengaging from
the post would remain the same. The posts are not connected after the vehicle impacts post 1,
therefore the increase in energy absorption by the vehicle would occur at discrete steps as the vehicle
contacts each subsequent post. The pattern of energy absorption would then be linear and the effect of
the increase in stiffness by the 9lb/ft post can be shown in the worst case by increasing the
acceleration experienced by the vehicle by 14% at each step after contact with the 2nd post.

The longitudinal acceleration from the trap report of MET161203 was used as a baseline to show that
with the additional 14% energy increase, the occupant risk factors are still within limits of MASH. Figure
15 shows the addition of 14% added to the raw data values at each post interaction after the vehicle
makes contact with the 2nd post. The Trap reports listed below shows the original Occupant Impact
Velocity at 10.8 m/s compared to the OIV for the modified Trap report of 11.4 m/s, which is under the
limit of MASH.

Therefore, 9lb/ft posts can be interchanged with 8.5lb/ft posts without any degradation to function or
performance of the system.

Influence of 9lb/ft System

5
Longitudinal Acceleration (G)

0
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6
-5
Time of Post 2 Contact
-10
10 msec Avg + 14.01%
-15
10 msec Avg
-20 Time of OIV

-25

-30
Time (sec)

Figure 15: Adjustment to raw longitudinal acceleration at contact with 2nd post for the 14.01% increase
in energy absorption for each 9lb/ft post.

23
Test 3-32 5 deg

Test Summary Report (Using SAE Class 180 Filter on Acceleration Data and Angular Velocity/Displa

General Information
Test Agency: STI
Test Number: MET161203
Test Date: 12/03/16
Test Article: MaX-Tension
Test Vehicle
Description: 2011 Kia Rio
Test Inertial Mass: 1105 kg
Gross Static Mass: 1180 kg
Impact Conditions
Speed: 99.3 km/h
Angle: 5.0 degrees

Occupant Risk Factors

Impact Velocity (m/s) at 0.2092 seconds on front of interior
x-direction 10.8
y-direction 0.2

THIV (km/hr): 38.9 at 0.2092 seconds on front of interior

THIV (m/s): 10.8
Ridedown Accelerations (g's)
x-direction -10.9 (0.3918 - 0.4018 seconds)
y-direction 3.3 (0.3986 - 0.4086 seconds)
PHD (g's): 11.0 (0.3919 - 0.4019 seconds)

ASI: 1.49 (0.1435 - 0.1935 seconds)

Max. 50msec Moving Avg. Accelerations (g's)

x-direction -15.8 (0.1258 - 0.1758 seconds)
y-direction 1.8 (0.3582 - 0.4082 seconds)
z-direction -4.3 (0.1477 - 0.1977 seconds)
Max Roll, Pitch, and Yaw Angles (degrees)
Roll -28.9 (1.2997 seconds)
Pitch -46.7 (0.8505 seconds)
Yaw 83.9 (1.2915 seconds)

24
 X Acceleration at CG
10
Longitudinal Acceleration (G)

-10

-20
Test Number: MET161203
Test Article: MaX-Tension
Test Vehicle: 2011 Kia Rio
-30 Inertial Mass: 1105 kg
Gross Mass: 1180 kg
Impact Speed: 99.3 km/h
Impact Angle: 5 degrees
-40
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0
Time (sec)
Time of OIV (0.2092 sec) SAE Class 60 Filter
50-msec average 10-msec average

Figure 16: 3-32 Test TRAP X-Trace

25
Test 3-32 5 deg 9 lb Modified

Test Summary Report (Using SAE Class 180 Filter on Acceleration Data and Angular Velocity/Displa

General Information
Test Agency: STI
Test Number: MET161203
Test Date: 12/03/16
Test Article: MaX-Tension
Test Vehicle
Description: 2011 Kia Rio
Test Inertial Mass: 1105 kg
Gross Static Mass: 1180 kg
Impact Conditions
Speed: 99.3 km/h
Angle: 5.0 degrees

Occupant Risk Factors

Impact Velocity (m/s) at 0.2061 seconds on front of interior
x-direction 11.4
y-direction 0.2

THIV (km/hr): 41.0 at 0.2061 seconds on front of interior

THIV (m/s): 11.4
Ridedown Accelerations (g's)
x-direction -12.4 (0.3917 - 0.4017 seconds)
y-direction 3.3 (0.3986 - 0.4086 seconds)
PHD (g's): 12.5 (0.3917 - 0.4017 seconds)

ASI: 1.58 (0.1447 - 0.1947 seconds)

Max. 50msec Moving Avg. Accelerations (g's)

x-direction -17.0 (0.1257 - 0.1757 seconds)
y-direction 1.8 (0.3582 - 0.4082 seconds)
z-direction -4.3 (0.1477 - 0.1977 seconds)
Max Roll, Pitch, and Yaw Angles (degrees)
Roll -28.9 (1.2997 seconds)
Pitch -46.7 (0.8505 seconds)
Yaw 83.9 (1.2915 seconds)

26
 X Acceleration at CG - 9l b Modified
10
Longitudinal Acceleration (G)

-10

-20
Test Number: MET161203
Test Article: MaX-Tension
Test Vehicle: 2011 Kia Rio
-30 Inertial Mass: 1105 kg
Gross Mass: 1180 kg
Impact Speed: 99.3 km/h
Impact Angle: 5 degrees
-40
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0
Time (sec)
Time of OIV (0.2061 sec) SAE Class 60 Filter
50-msec average 10-msec average

Figure 17: Modified 3-32 Test TRAP X-Trace

27
 Figure 18: I-Beam Cross-Section

W6x9 W6x8.5
(W150x13.5) (W150x12.6)
Reference d_SDI- Highway Safety Corp.
Source Unit CCI_Product_Catalog.pdf PO-36 MOD-S.pdf Remarks
w [lbs/ft] 9 Weight
A [in2] 2.68 Area
d [in] 5.90 5.830 Web Length
bf [in] 3.940 3.940 Flange Width
tf [in] 0.215 0.195 Flange Thickness
tw [in] 0.170 0.170 Web Thickness
L [in] 32.0 32.0 Length of Post
A1 [in2] 0.847 0.768 Area of Flange 1
A1*y^2 [in4] 6.84 6.10 Section Modulus
A2 [in2] 0.930 0.925 Area of Web
A3 [in2] 0.847 0.768 Area of Flange 2
A3*y^2 [in4] 6.84 6.10 Section Modulus
A=A1+A2+A3 [in2] 2.62 2.46 Section Modulus
Elasticity [psi] 29000000.0 29000000.0
Ix1 [in4] 6.85 6.10
Ix2 [in4] 2.32 2.28
Ix3 [in4] 6.85 6.10
Moment of Inertia
Ix [in4] 16.0 14.5 about the x-axis
Moment of Inertia
Iy [in4] 2.19 1.99 about the y-axis
Moment arm in the
Cx [in] 2.95 2.915 x-direction
Moment arm in the
Cy [in] 1.97 1.97 y-direction
Ix/Cx [in3] 5.43 4.97 8.47%
Iy/Cy [in3] 1.11 1.01 9.293%
M [lb-in] 32 32 0.00%
Table 4: 8 1/2lb and 9lb Bending Stress Calculation Sx, Sy at point B
28
 Bending
Stress
Sx [psi] 5.89 6.44 -9.25%
Energy U [lb-in] 0.0000353 0.0000390 -10.57%
Energy U
[lb-in] 0.0000503 0.0000563 -11.96%
after Mx
Bending
Stress
Sy [psi] 29 32 -10.25%
Energy U [lb-in] 0.00026 0.00028 -10.25%
Energy U
[lb-in] 0.00120 0.00136 -14.01%
after My
F [lb-in] 1 1 0.00%
Shear Stress
Sx [psi] 0.381 0.406 -6.61%
Shear Stress
Sy [psi] 0.381 0.406 -6.610%
Total Stress [psi] 6.276 6.847 -9.09%
Table 4 (cont.): 8.5 lb/ft and 9 lb/ft Bending Stress Calculation Sx, Sy at point B

1 1 1 𝑉𝑉 2
(1) 𝑈𝑈 = 𝑉𝑉𝑉𝑉𝑉𝑉 = 𝑉𝑉𝑉𝑉𝜖𝜖 2 = 𝜎𝜎
2 2 2 𝐸𝐸
F 2L
(2) 𝑈𝑈 = , 𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠 𝑒𝑒𝑒𝑒𝑒𝑒𝑒𝑒𝑒𝑒𝑒𝑒 𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐 𝑣𝑣𝑣𝑣𝑣𝑣𝑣𝑣𝑣𝑣𝑣𝑣𝑣𝑣𝑣𝑣𝑣𝑣
2𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸

Average difference between 8.5 lb/ft post and 9 lb/ft about 14.01%, with 9 lb/ft having more capacity.

29
Ground Anchor Modification
In all tests performed, 8” post driving stiffeners were welded alongside the bends of the Soil Anchor
post to prevent the head of the soil anchor from deforming during installation. Impact force during post
driving have a tendency to deform the top of the Soil Anchor. To prevent this deformation, the
stiffeners are added to increase the vertical rigidity of the Soil Anchor during driving. The post driving
stiffeners are not critical to the longitudinal rigidity of the system and can therefore be shortened to 6”
to accommodate manufacturing of the post.

Figure 18: Stiffeners on the Soil Anchor

30