Numerical Studies on Concrete Barriers Subject to MASH Truck Impact
Publication: Journal of Bridge Engineering
Volume 25, Issue 7
Abstract
In January 2016, the FHWA and AASHTO announced a joint agreement that only bridge railing and longitudinal barriers evaluated using the 2016 edition of Manual for Assessing Safety Hardware (MASH) will be allowed for new permanent installations after December 31, 2019. However, in the current AASHTO-LRFD, railing design forces and their applications for concrete barriers have not been updated to MASH requirements, and the detailed impact process of the MASH truck on concrete barriers has not been systematically investigated. In most of the previous studies on MASH truck impacts, the concrete barrier had been assumed to be a rigid structure capable of sustaining a vehicular impact without any significant damage. This assumption neglects the deformation of the barrier and does not improve our understanding on the barrier's failure mechanisms. In this study, high-fidelity finite-element simulations have been carried out to investigate the demands imposed upon, and damage modes of, MASH TL-4 and TL-5 concrete barriers. An inelastic pushover analysis approach is proposed for the evaluation of the capacity of these concrete barriers. Based on the damage mode observed from the pushover analysis, a modified yielding line method (MYLM) is proposed for estimating the capacity of concrete barriers. It is observed that the capacity of concrete barriers estimated by the proposed MYLM matches with that from the pushover analysis quite well and it is generally much higher than from the current AASHTO-LRFD specifications.
Get full access to this article
View all available purchase options and get full access to this article.
Data Availability Statement
Some or all data, models, or code that support the findings of this study are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request. Some or all data, models, or code generated or used during the study are proprietary or confidential in nature and may only be provided with restrictions.
Acknowledgments
This material is based upon work supported by the Federal Highway Administration under Contract No. DTFH61-14-D-00010. This research was supported, in part, under National Science Foundation Grant Nos. CNS-0958379, CNS-0855217, and ACI-1126113 and the City University of New York High-Performance Computing Center at the College of Staten Island. This study was also partially supported by the INSPIRE University Transportation Center (UTC). Financial support for INSPIRE UTC projects is provided by the US Department of Transportation, Office of the Assistant Secretary for Research and Technology (USDOT/OST-R) under Grant No. 69A3551747126 through the INSPIRE University Transportation Center (http://inspire-utc.mst.edu) at Missouri University of Science and Technology. Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this publication are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the Federal Highway Administration, the USDOT/OST-R, or the National Science Foundation.
References
AASHTO. 1989. Guide specifications for bridge railings. Washington, DC: AASHTO.
AASHTO. 2017. AASHTO LRFD bridge design specifications. 8th ed. Washington, DC: AASHTO.
Agrawal, A. K., S. El-Tawil, R. Cao, X. Xu, X. Chen, and W. Wong. 2018. A performance based approach for loading definition of heavy vehicle impact events. Rep. No. FHWA-HIF-18-062. McLean, VA: FHWA.
Agrawal, A. K., S. El-Tawil, R. Cao, and W. Wong. 2019. Implementation of crash simulation technology to validate the design impact loads for concrete bridge railings under “MASH”. McLean, VA: FHWA.
Ahmed, E. A., C. Dulude, and B. Benmokrane. 2013. “Concrete bridge barriers reinforced with glass fibre-reinforced polymer: Static tests and pendulum impacts.” Can. J. Civ. Eng. 40 (11): 1050–1059. https://doi.org/10.1139/cjce-2013-0019.
Bligh, R. P. 2017. Design guidelines for TL-3 through TL-5 roadside barrier systems placed on mechanically stabilized earth (MSE) retaining walls. NCHRP Project No. 22-20(02). Washington, DC: National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine.
Cao, R., A. K. Agrawal, S. El-Tawil, X. Xu, and W. Wong. 2019a. “Heavy truck collision with bridge piers: Computational simulation study.” J. Bridge Eng. 24 (6): 04019052. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)BE.1943-5592.0001398.
Cao, R., A. K. Agrawal, S. El-Tawil, X. Xu, and W. Wong. 2019b. “Performance-based design framework for bridge piers subjected to truck collision.” J. Bridge Eng. 24 (7): 04019064. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)BE.1943-5592.0001423.
Cao, R., S. El-Tawil, A. K. Agrawal, X. Xu, and W. Wong. 2019c. “Behavior and design of bridge piers subjected to heavy truck collision.” J. Bridge Eng. 24 (7): 04019057. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)BE.1943-5592.0001414.
Figueroa, A. M., E. Negron, G. Portela, R. N. Gonzalez-Rivera, H. Diaz-Alvarez, and G. I. Velazquez. 2011. Evaluation of bridges subjected to military loading and dynamic hydraulic effects: Review of design regulations, selection criteria, and inspection procedures for bridge railing systems. Rep. No. ERDC/GSL-TR-11-24. Vicksburg, MS: Engineer Research and Development Center, Geotechnical and Structures Laboratory.
Fujikake, K., B. Li, and S. Soeun. 2009. “Impact response of reinforced concrete beam and its analytical evaluation.” J. Struct. Eng. 135 (8): 938–950. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)ST.1943-541X.0000039.
Hallquist, J. O. 2006. LS-DYNA theory manual. Livermore, CA: Livermore Software Technology Corporation.
Hirsch, T. J. 1978. Analytical evaluation of Texas bridge rails to contain buses and trucks. Rep. No. FHWA TX 78-230-2. College Station, TX: Texas State Dept. of Highways and Public Transportation, Texas Transportation Institute, Texas A&M Univ.
Jeon, S. J., M. S. Choi, and Y. J. Kim. 2011. “Failure mode and ultimate strength of precast concrete barrier.” ACI Struct. J. 108 (1): 99–107.
MASH (Manual for Assessing Safety Hardware). 2009. AASHTO subcommittee on bridges and structures. Washington, DC: MASH.
MASH (Manual for Assessing Safety Hardware). 2016. AASHTO subcommittee on bridges and structures. 2nd ed. Washington, DC: MASH.
Michie, J. D. 1981. Recommended procedures for the safety performance evaluation of highway appurtenances. NCHRP Rep. No. 230. Washington, DC: TRB, National Research Council.
Miele, C. R., C. Plaxico, D. Stephens, and S. Simunovic. 2010. U26: Enhanced finite element analysis crash model of tractor-trailers (phase C). Knoxville, TN: National Transportation Research Center, Inc. Univ. Transportation Center.
Murray, Y. D., A. Y. Abu-Odeh, and R. P. Bligh. 2007. Evaluation of LS-DYNA concrete material model 159. Rep. No. FHWA-HRT-05-063. McLean, VA: FHWA.
Namy, M., J.-P. Charron, and B. Massicotte. 2015. “Structural behavior of bridge decks with cast-in-place and precast concrete barriers: Numerical modeling.” J. Bridge Eng. 20 (12): 04015014. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)BE.1943-5592.0000751.
NHTSA (National Highway Traffic Safety Administration). 2014. Traffic safety facts 2014. Rep. No. DOT HS 812 279. Washington, DC: NHTSA.
NTRCI (National Transportation Research Center, Inc). 2005. “F800 single unit truck FEM model for crash simulations with LS-DYNA.” Accessed March 29, 2019. https://thyme.ornl.gov/fhwa/f800webpage/description/desc1.html.
Ross, Jr., H., D. Sicking, R. Zimmer, and J. Michie. 1993. Recommended procedures for the safety performance evaluation of highway features. NCHRP Rep. No. 350. Washington, DC: Transportation Research Board.
SAE (Society of Automotive Engineers). 1995. Instrumentation for impact test—Part 1—Electronic instrumentation. SAE J211-1. Warrendale, PA: SAE International.
Schrum, K., D. Sicking, and N. Uddin. 2016. Evaluation of design loads for concrete bridge rails. Final Report. Atlanta, GA: National Center for Transportation Systems Productivity and Management.
Sennah, K., and H. Khederzadeh. 2014. “Development of cost-effective PL-3 concrete bridge barrier reinforced with sand-coated glass fibre reinforced (GFRP) bars: Vehicle crash test.” Can. J. Civ. Eng. 41 (4): 357–367. https://doi.org/10.1139/cjce-2013-0393.
Sheikh, N. M., R. P. Bligh, and W. L. Menges. 2011. Determination of minimum height and lateral design load for MASH test level 4 bridge rails. Rep. No. 9-1002-5. College Station, TX: Texas A&M Transportation Institute.
Silvestri-Dobrovolny, C., N. Schulz, S. Moran, T. Skinner, R. Bligh, and W. Williams. 2017. MASH equivalency of NCHRP 350-approved bridge railings. NCHRP Project No. 20-07. Washington, DC: TCHRP.
Xu, X., R. Cao, S. El-Tawil, A. K. Agrawal, and W. Wong. 2019. “Loading definition and design of bridge piers impacted by medium weight trucks.” J. Bridge Eng. 24 (6): 04019042. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)BE.1943-5592.0001397.
Zaouk, A. K., N. E. Bedewi, C.-D. Kan, and D. Marzougui. 1996. “Validation of a non-linear finite element vehicle model using multiple impact data.” Appl. Mech. Div. 218: 91–106.
Information & Authors
Information
Published In
Journal of Bridge Engineering
Volume 25 • Issue 7 • July 2020
Copyright
© 2020 American Society of Civil Engineers.
History
Received: Jul 18, 2019
Accepted: Jan 13, 2020
Published online: Apr 21, 2020
Published in print: Jul 1, 2020
Discussion open until: Sep 21, 2020
Authors
Metrics & Citations
Metrics
Citations
Download citation
If you have the appropriate software installed, you can download article citation data to the citation manager of your choice. Simply select your manager software from the list below and click Download.