journal article·2023-09-05Open access

Numerical and Experimental Analysis to Develop a SB6/H3 High Containment Level Concrete Median Barrier

Yoseok Jeong, Ilkeun Lee, Jaeha Lee, Kyeongjin Kim, Geunhyeong Min, WooSeok Kim

Abstract

Abstract As the number of heavy vehicles on the road continues to increase, collisions involving heavy vehicles and concrete median barriers (CMB) occur more frequently than in the past. Consequently, there is a growing need for research into more stringent design standards and improvements to the current CMB and their performance under harsh conditions. High-performance CMB is required to in order to withstand such conditions. This paper presents the results of numerical simulations and full-scale field tests to develop a high-performance CMB. To facilitate the development of the high-performance CMB, the concept of a deformable CMB was applied to the rigid CMB. A new apparatus called the shock absorber composed of dowel bars surrounded by empty space were introduced to make the rigid CMB deformable. In order to prevent local failure at the top of the barrier from a sudden high increase in impact energy, the deformable CMB was strengthened by adding reinforcements and widening the top based on the results of numerical simulations. The full-scale field tests were conducted on the proposed deformable CMB and took into account three appraisal areas: (1) structural adequacy, (2) occupant risk, and (3) vehicle trajectory after collision. The results of these tests showed that the deformable CMB contained and redirected the vehicle without allowing it to penetrate or override the deformable CMB. No detached elements, fragmentation, or other debris from the barrier were present. Therefore, the proposed high-performance CMB fulfilled all of the requirements of the crash test guideline.
Source: crossref · Quality: baseline

Research context

OpenAlex topics: Transportation Safety and Impact Analysis · Structural Response to Dynamic Loads · Automotive and Human Injury Biomechanics

SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.

References (27)

Show source-provided references
1. AASHTO. (2016). Manual for assessing safety hardware (MASH). In. Washington, DC: Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials.
2. Ahn, H. I., Kim, D. S., Moon, B. K., & Kim, K. D. (2021). Assessment of structural adequacy of semi-rigid safety barriers. International journal of crashworthiness, 1–14.10.1080/13588265.2021.1981190 ↗
3. Auyeung, S., Alipour, A., & Saini, D. (2019). Performance-based design of bridge piers under vehicle collision. Engineering Structures, 191, 752–765.10.1016/j.engstruct.2019.03.005 ↗
4. Borovinšek, M., Vesenjak, M., Ulbin, M., & Ren, Z. (2007). Simulation of crash tests for high containment levels of road safety barriers. Engineering Failure Analysis, 14(8), 1711–1718.10.1016/j.engfailanal.2006.11.068 ↗
5. CEB-FIP. (2012). FIB Model Code for Concrete Structures 2010. In (pp. 434). New Jersey, U.S.: Ernst & Sohn publishing house.
6. CEN. (2012). EN 1317 European Standard for Road Restraint Systems. In.
7. Chung, C.-H., Lee, J.-W., Kim, S.-Y., & Lee, J.-H. (2011). Influencing factors on numerical simulation of crash between RC slab and soft projectile. Journal of the Computational Structural Engineering Institute of Korea, 24(6), 591–599.
8. Dinnella, N., Chiappone, S., & Guerrieri, M. (2020). The innovative “NDBA” concrete safety barrier able to withstand two subsequent TB81 crash tests. Engineering Failure Analysis, 115, 104660.10.1016/j.engfailanal.2020.104660 ↗
9. El-Tawil, S., Severino, E., & Fonseca, P. (2005). Vehicle collision with bridge piers. Journal of Bridge Engineering, 10(3), 345–353.10.1061/(ASCE)1084-0702(2005)10:3(345) ↗
10. Ferdous, M. R., Abu-Odeh, A., Bligh, R. P., & Jones, H. L. (2013). Placement of traffic barriers on roadside and median slopes–guidelines based on numerical simulations. International Journal of Crashworthiness, 18(2), 110–125.10.1080/13588265.2013.763610 ↗
11. Ferdous, M. R., Abu-Odeh, A., Bligh, R. P., Jones, H. L., & Sheikh, N. M. (2011). Performance limit analysis for common roadside and median barriers using LS-DYNA. International Journal of Crashworthiness, 16(6), 691–706.10.1080/13588265.2011.623023 ↗
12. Grzebieta, R., Koay, K., & Zou, R. (1999). Road-side crash barriers–Can they be modelled? Paper presented at the Australian MADYMO Users Meeting
13. JRA. (2008). Installation specification of safety barrier and commentary. In. Tokyo, Japan: Japan Road Association
14. Kim, W., Lee, I., Jeong, Y., Zi, G., Kim, K., & Lee, J. (2018). Design approach for improving current concrete median barriers on highways in South Korea. Journal of Performance of Constructed Facilities, 32(3), 04018022.10.1061/(ASCE)CF.1943-5509.0001168 ↗
15. Kim, W., Lee, I., Kim, K., Jeong, Y., & Lee, J. (2019). Evaluation of concrete barriers with novel shock absorbers subjected to impact loading. Archives of Civil and Mechanical Engineering, 19, 657–671.10.1016/j.acme.2019.01.004 ↗
16. Lee, J., Jeong, Y., Kim, K., Lee, I., & Kim, W. (2019). Experimental and numerical investigation of deformable concrete median barrier. Materials, 12(19), 1–21.10.3390/ma12193176 ↗
17. Lee, J., Zi, G., Lee, I., Jeong, Y., Kim, K., & Kim, W. (2017). Numerical simulation on concrete median barrier for reducing concrete fragment under harsh impact loading of a 25-ton truck. Journal of Engineering Materials and Technology, 139(2), 021015.10.1115/1.4035766 ↗
18. LSTC. (2007). LS-DYNA Keyword user’s manual volume I. In: livermore software technology corporation (LSTC).
19. Madurapperuma, M., & Niwa, K. (2014). Concrete material models in LS-DYNA for impact analysis of reinforced concrete structures. Paper presented at the Applied Mechanics and Materials.10.4028/www.scientific.net/AMM.566.173 ↗
20. MOLIT. (2015). Real Impact Test Guideline for Vehicle Safety Guard. In. Sejong, Korea: Ministry of Land, Infrastructure and Trasport.
21. Murray, Y. D. (2007). Users manual for LS-DYNA concrete material model 159. Retrieved from
22. Naish, D. A., & Burbridge, A. (2015). Occupant severity prediction from simulation of small car impact with various concrete barrier profiles. International Journal of Crashworthiness, 20(5), 510–523.10.1080/13588265.2015.1048177 ↗
23. NCAC. (2020). National crash analysis Center. Retrieved from https://www.nhtsa.gov/crash-simulation-vehicle-models
24. Saini, D., & Shafei, B. (2018). Numerical investigation of CFRP-composite-strengthened RC bridge piers against vehicle collision. Retrieved from
25. Saini, D., & Shafei, B. (2019). Performance of concrete-filled steel tube bridge columns subjected to vehicle collision. Journal of Bridge Engineering, 24(8), 04019074.10.1061/(ASCE)BE.1943-5592.0001439 ↗
26. Wu, Y., Crawford, J. E., & Magallanes, J. M. (2012). Performance of LS-DYNA concrete constitutive models. Paper presented at the 12th International LS-DYNA users conference
27. Yin, H., Fang, H., Wang, Q., & Wen, G. (2016). Design optimization of a MASH TL-3 concrete barrier using RBF-based metamodels and nonlinear finite element simulations. Engineering Structures, 114, 122–134.10.1016/j.engstruct.2016.02.009 ↗