Archive




Volume 4, Issue 2, April 2016, Page: 59-64
Impact Performance of W-beam Guardrail Supported by Different Shaped Posts
Tso-Liang Teng, Department of Mechanical Engineering, Hsiuping University of Science and Technology, Taichung, Taiwan
Cho-Chung Liang, Department of Mechanical and Automation Engineering, Da-Yeh University, Changhua, Taiwan
Ching-Yu Hsu, Department of Marine Mechanical Engineering, ROC Naval Academy, Taiwan
Chien-Jong Shih, Department of Mechanical and Electro-Mechanical Engineering, Tam-Kang University, Taipei, Tawan
Thanh-Tung Tran, Department of Mechanical and Automation Engineering, Da-Yeh University, Changhua, Taiwan
Received: Apr. 10, 2016;       Published: Apr. 11, 2016
DOI: 10.11648/j.ijmea.20160402.14      View  4873      Downloads  215
Abstract
This study applied the finite element code LS-DYNA for evaluating the crashworthiness of W-beam guardrail. Four crash test simulations were conducted for evaluating the safety performance of the W-beam guardrail with four different post configuration according to the European standard EN1317. The results showed that the best performance was demonstrated by the sigma-shaped posts and the I-shaped posts absorbed the lowest amount of impact energy. The optimal result was registered by the barrier with sigma-shaped posts, which demonstrated a lower ASI value and higher energy crash absorption than the other models did.
Keywords
Roadside Safety, Energy Absorption, Crashworthiness, LS-DYNA, EN1317
To cite this article
Tso-Liang Teng, Cho-Chung Liang, Ching-Yu Hsu, Chien-Jong Shih, Thanh-Tung Tran, Impact Performance of W-beam Guardrail Supported by Different Shaped Posts, International Journal of Mechanical Engineering and Applications. Vol. 4, No. 2, 2016, pp. 59-64. doi: 10.11648/j.ijmea.20160402.14
Reference
[1]
European Committee for Standardization, European Standard EN 1317-1, EN 1317-2, Road Restraint Systems, 2010.
[2]
Safe Direction. Protecting Life & Property. W-beam guardrail semi-rigid protection. Product manual. Ref: PM 003/01. http://www.safedirection.com.au.
[3]
Ali Osman Atahan, Ayhan Oner Yucel, Muhanmet Musab Erdem. Crash testing and evaluation of a new generation L1 containment level guardrail. Engineering Failure Analysis 38 (2014) 25-37.
[4]
Tso-Liang Teng, Cho-Chung Liang, Thanh-Tung Tran. Effect of various W-beam guardrail post spacing and rail heights on safety performance. Advances in Mechanical Engineering, Vol. 7(11) 1-16.
[5]
LS-DYNA Keyword user’s manual. Livermore Software Technology Corporation, 2007.
[6]
LS-DYNA Theoretical Manual. Livermore Software Technology Corporation, Livermore 2006.
[7]
Finite Element Model Archive, FHWA/NHTSA National Crash Analysis Center. 2008. Http://Www.ncac.gwu.edu/vml/models.html (2008 November, accessed 1 Dec, 2013)
[8]
K Habibagahi and J A Langer, ‘Horizontal Subgrade Modulus of Granular Soils’, in Laterally Loaded Deep Foundations, Langer, Mosely and Thompson, eds., ASTM Publication Code No. 04-835000-38, American Society for Testing Materials, 1984, pp. 21-34.
[9]
Plaxico, G. S. Patzner and M H Ray. Finite element modelling of guardrail timber posts and the post-soil interaction. In Transportation Research Record 1647, p.p. 139-146 (1998).
[10]
Plaxico, C. A., G. S. Patzner and M. H. Ray, “Effects of post and soil strength on the performance of the modified eccentric loader breakaway cable terminal (MELT)” (1999).
[11]
C. A. Plaxico, R. M. Hackett and W. Uddin, Simulation of a Vehicle Impacting a Modified Thrie-Beam Guardrail, In Transportation Research Board 1599,National Academy Press, Washington, D. C., 1997.
[12]
Texas Transport Institude, TTI. Test risk assessment program (TRAP) version 2.2 user’s manual. July 2002.
Browse journals by subject