Logged in as: Public User

32-inch Concr Barrier Test Level

State MN
Description Text I remember hearing that the 32-inch, Concrete J-Shape Barrier did not pass the MASH TL-4 test.
As I remember, it was determined to be mostly a height issue (therefor the F-Shape was also considered to be a likely failure as well).

Do you know where that information is located?

Also, do you know if the 42-inch barrier was looked at?
  • Bridge Rails
Other Keywords none
Date March 19, 2014


You are correct that TL-4 testing of the 10000S single unit truck vehicle during the NCHRP 22-14 project resulted in the truck rolling over the rail in tests at TTI and MwRSF. The increased mass and velocity of the new TL-4 test criteria in MASH have created a more severe test both in terms of impact loading and vehicle stability.


I have attached the TTI report to the email and placed a link to the MwRSF report below.




Subsequent to this work, MwRSF and TTI have done some research into revised barrier heights. MwRSF performed simulation analysis of a vertical shape precast bridge rail design that indicated that 34.5” high vertical shape barriers could potentially meet MASH TL-4. However, this system was never full-scale crash tested to verify those results.


TTI also performed simulation analysis of single-slope barriers that indicated that 36”  high single-slope barriers would meet MASH TL-4. TTI tested the 36” high single-slope barrier with the 10000S vehicle and found that it did safety redirect the SUT vehicle.




No testing of increased height safety shape barriers has been performed to date, so we cannot definitively say what the height for those sections would be. However, based on the previously research, it would be recommended that a minimum height of 36” would be reasonable and that the required height may decrease as the barrier geometry becomes more vertical.


No 42” high barriers have been tested to MASH TL-4 to the best of my knowledge. It is highly likely that these barriers would meet MASH in terms of vehicle stability. Keep in mind that it is believed that the MASH TL-4 impact loads have increased as well due to the increased speed and mass. Thus, barrier reinforcement for existing TL-4 barriers may need to be re-evaluated.



Date March 31, 2014
Attachment nchrp_w157.pdf

Contact Us:
130 Whittier Research Center
2200 Vine Street
Lincoln, NE 68583-0853
(402) 472-0965
Email: mwrsf@unl.edu
The information contained on the Midwest Roadside Safety Facility (MwRSF) website is subject to change without prior notice. The University of Nebraska and the MwRSF is not responsible or liable, directly or indirectly, for any damage or loss caused or alleged to be caused by or in connection with the use or misuse of or reliance upon any such content, goods, or services available on this site.