roadside barriers - mash implementation update & design ... · roadside barriers - lessons...

60
Roadside Barriers - MASH Implementation Update & Design Lessons Learned Richard Stepp and Derwood Sheppard 2019

Upload: others

Post on 08-Aug-2020

9 views

Category:

Documents


0 download

TRANSCRIPT

Page 1: Roadside Barriers - MASH Implementation Update & Design ... · Roadside Barriers - Lessons Learned 1. GUARDRAIL Standard Plans, Index 536-001 2. CONCRETE BARRIER Standard Plans, Index

Roadside Barriers - MASH Implementation Update amp Design Lessons Learned

Richard Stepp and Derwood Sheppard

2019

Roadside Barriers - Lessons Learned

1 GUARDRAIL Standard Plans Index 536-001

2 CONCRETE BARRIER Standard Plans Index 521-001

3 PIER PROTECTION BARRIER Standard Plans Index 521-002

Roadside Barriers - Lessons Learned

Design is generally governed by

1 FDOT Design Manual (FDM)httpswwwfdotgovroadwayfdmdefaultshtm

Roadside Barriers - Lessons Learned

Design is generally governed by

2 FDOT Standard Planshttpswwwfdotgovdesignstandardplans

Roadside Barriers - Lessons Learned

Design is generally governed by

3 Standard Plans Instructionshttpswwwfdotgovdesignstandardplans

Roadside Barriers - Lessons Learned

Design is generally governed by

4 Standard Specificationshttpswwwfdotgovprogrammanagement

implementedspecbooksdefaultshtm

Grading Any issues here

Guardrail Index 536-001

Answerhellip

YES

bull Front slope looks too steep

bull Slope break likely too close to post

Photo Credit Bill Fitzgerald PEKLS Engineering LLC

Grading lsquoStandard Postrsquo Requirements

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheet 6

bull Front slope must be 12 or flatter

bull Slope break must be 2 feet behind postUnless

Grading lsquoDeep Postrsquo Requirements

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheet 6

bull If lsquoDeep Postrsquo is called for slope break may be located at Center Line of post

bull STILL Front slope must be 12 or flatterNote Unique Pay Item 536-7-1

Guardrail Index 536-001

Shoulder Widens Any issue here

Answerhellip YESbull ldquoTaper Raterdquo requirement is violatedbull Per Standard Plans Instructions (SPI) Part I

bull Design Speed le 45 mph requires 110 Maxbull Design Speed gt 45mph requires 115 Max

Single Face to Double Face Any Issue

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheet 9

Answerhellip

YES

bull ldquoTrailing Anchoragerdquo Standard is not used here (not detailed this way)

Index 536-001 does not show this as a Trailing Anchorage scenario and the details are not compatible or required

Single Face to Double Face Solution

Guardrail Index 536-001

Call for a Standard ldquoFlared End Unitrdquo (included with General Guardrail Pay Item) More guidance provided in next yearrsquos eBook

bull No ldquoTrailing Anchoragerdquo

bull Just call out Begin and End of guardrail types (on face closest to traveled way)

CRT System (Radial) Any issue here

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 11 amp 12

AnswerhellipYES

First IssueObstruction is in the ldquoClear Area Limitrdquo per Standard Plans

(Controlled Release Terminal)

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 11 amp 12

CRT System (Radial)AnswerhellipYES

First IssueObstruction is in the ldquoClear Area Limitrdquo per Standard Plans

Photo Credit Bill Fitzgerald PEKLS Engineering LLC

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 11 amp 12

bull ldquoClear Areardquo Required (15rsquox30rsquo)

bull ldquoClear Areardquo is free of obstructions and has 12 Slope Max

CRT System (Radial) From Standard Planshellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 11 amp 12

Requires 25-footlinear End TreatmentPer Standard Plans

(12rsquo-6rdquo Shown)

CRT System (Radial) Any other issue here

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 11 amp 12

bull 25-foot linear End Treatment required

bull If this is not possible due limited space use a lsquovariationrsquo for General Radial Guardrail (Not CRT)(No breakaway posts)

CRT System (Radial) Per Standard Planshellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheet 20

Pipe Rail Callouts Any issue hereAnswerhellip YES

Pipe Rail must terminate outside of End Treatments per SPI Part E and Standard PlansSolution

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 13-15

Rigid Barrier Connections End Shielding

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 13-15

Rigid Barrier Connection Any Issue HereAnswerhellip YES

asymp13 foot overlap with barrier is no longer Standard

(Overlap now only 7frac14rdquo Since FY2017-18 Standards for newsingle-faced guardrail)

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 13-15

Rigid Barrier Connection Any Issues HereYES

asymp13 foot overlap with barrier is no longer Standard

(Overlap now only 7frac14rdquo Since FY2017-18 Standards for newsingle-faced guardrail)

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 13-15

Rigid Barrier Connection Any Issues Here

Solution

YES

asymp13 foot overlap with barrier is no longer Standard

(Overlap now only 7frac14rdquo Since FY2017-18 Standards for newsingle-faced guardrail)

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8 13-14

Answerhellip

YES

Guardrail system ishellip

not long enough

Rigid Barrier Connection Any issue here

Minimum Length is Length of Approach Transition Connection lsquoLArsquoplus Length of End Treatment lsquoLErsquo

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8 13-14

Rigid Barrier End Shielding Min Length TL-2

lsquoLArsquo 213rsquo

+lsquoLErsquo 406rsquo

=

62rsquo

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8 13-14

Rigid Barrier End Shielding Min Length TL-2

lsquoLArsquo 213rsquo

+lsquoLErsquo 406rsquo

=

62rsquo

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8 13-14

Rigid Barrier End Shielding Min Length TL-3

lsquoLArsquo 306rsquo

+lsquoLErsquo 531rsquo

=

84rsquo

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8 13-14

Rigid Barrier End Shielding Min Length TL-3

lsquoLArsquo 306rsquo

+lsquoLErsquo 531rsquo

=

84rsquoNOTE If these lengths are not possible due to limited space consider the use of a Crash Cushion or a project-specific lsquovariationrsquo to fit the best barrier system possible

Contact Central Office for assistance

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Any issues hereAnswerhellip YES

1 Flared terminals not permitted per RDB18-02

2 Curbed conditions require parallel Approach Terminals per Standard Plans ampSPI Part C3 Approach Terminals require lsquoType Ersquo Curb

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals

From Standard Planshellip

Answerhellip YES

1 Flared terminals not permitted per RDB18-02

2 Curbed conditions require parallel Approach Terminals per Standard Plans ampSPI Part C3 Approach Terminals require lsquoType Ersquo Curb

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Solution

1 Flared terminals not permitted per RDB18-02

2 Curbed conditions require parallel Approach Terminals per Standard Plans

3 Approach Terminals require lsquoType Ersquo Curb

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Any issues hereYES Wrong

First issuehellipFront slope break should be 6 feet behind guardrail face at post 1 per the Standards (110 Max)

Second issuehellipMisc Asphalt should extend 10 feet upstream of post 1 per Standards

Answerhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach TerminalsYES Wrong

First issuehellipFront slope break should be 6 feet behind guardrail face at post 1 per the Standards (110 Min)

Second issuehellipMisc Asphalt should extend 10 feet upstream of post 1 per Standards

Answerhellip

From Standard Planshellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach TerminalsYES Wrong

First issuehellipFront slope break should be 6 feet behind guardrail face at post 1 per the Standards (110 Min)

Second issuehellipMisc Asphalt should extend 10 feet upstream of post 1 per Standards

Answerhellip

Example of Poor Slope Break Location (and steep slope not shielded)

Photo Credit Bill Fitzgerald PE

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach TerminalsYES Wrong

First issuehellipFront slope break should be 6 feet behind guardrail face at post 1 per the Standards (110 Min)

Second issuehellipMisc Asphalt should extend 10 feet upstream of post 1 per Standards

Answerhellip

Example of Poor Grading (The reason for Misc Asphalt requirement)

Photo Credit Bill Fitzgerald PE

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals SolutionYES Wrong

First issuehellipFront slope break should be 6 feet behind guardrail face at post 1 per the Standards (110 Min)

Second issuehellipMisc Asphalt should extend 10 feet upstream of post 1 per Standards

Answerhellip

Correctedhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Any issues hereYES Wrong

First issuehellipTrees are within the Approach Terminalrsquos clear area in the Standard Plans (where a clear 110 slope required)

Second issuehellipTree violates barrier setback per FDM Table 21542

Answerhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Any issues hereYES Wrong

First issuehellipTrees are within the Approach Terminalrsquos clear area in the Standard Plans (where a clear 110 slope required)

Second issuehellipTree violates barrier setback per FDM Table 21542

Answerhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach TerminalsYES Wrong

First issuehellipTrees are within the Approach Terminalrsquos clear area in the Standard Plans (where a clear 110 slope required)

From Standard Planshellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals

CREDIT VIRGINIA DOT ndash SKT Crash Test Published October 2016

httpswwwyoutubecomwatchv=OsKlfatcjogampfeature=youtube

httpswwwyoutubecomwatchv=h7tct7Oo9-8ampfeature=youtube

YES Wrong

First issuehellipTrees are within the Approach Terminalrsquos clear area in the Standard Plans (where a clear 110 slope required)

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals

CREDIT VIRGINIA DOT ndash SKT Crash Test Published October 2016

httpswwwyoutubecomwatchv=74ImLTY-PhUampfeature=youtube

YES Wrong

First issuehellipTrees are within the Approach Terminalrsquos clear area in the Standard Plans (where a clear 110 slope required)

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach TerminalsYES Wrong

First issuehellipTrees are within the Approach Terminalrsquos clear area in the Standard Plans (where a clear 110 slope required)

From Standard Planshellip

Guardrail Index 536-001

YES Wrong

Second issuehellipTree violates barrier setback per FDM Table 21542

Guardrail Index 536-001

YES Wrong

Second issuehellipTree violates barrier setback per FDM Table 21542

From FDMhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Any issue hereYES Wrong

First issuehellipPerpendicular guardrail is not proven crashworthybull No end treatmentsbull Violates ldquotaper raterdquo

requirements of SPI Part I (big time)

bull Requires shielding if within Clear Zone

Answerhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Any issue hereYES Wrong

Second issuehellipPerpendicular guardrail within the Approach Terminalrsquos clear area in the Standard Plans (where a clear 110 slope required)

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Any issue hereYES Wrong

Third issuehellipPerpendicular guardrail violates barrier setback per FDM Table 21542

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Solution 1

REMOVE theperpendicularGuardrail

Orhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Solution 2

1 Extend Guardrail to meet Length of Need per SPI Part B (Excel lsquoDesign Toolrsquo) which is Roadside Design Guide Eq 5-3

2 Meet minimum barrier setback per FDM Table 21542 (5 feet for general guardrail)

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Final Case StudyAssumptionsbull Design Speed

50 mph

bull Piers designed to withstand 600 kip impact load per FDM215454(Pier Protection Barrier notRequired)

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereAnswerhellip YES

First issuehellipPiers NOT shielded

ldquoLength of Needrdquo NOT met per SPI Part B (Excel Design Tool)

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereAnswerhellip YES

First issuehellipPiers NOT shielded

ldquoLength of Needrdquo NOT met per SPI Part B (Excel Design Tool)

Piers are behind the ldquogatingrdquo(break-away) portion of Approach Terminal

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereYES

Second issuehellipFlared Terminal usage on hold per RDB18-02

Regardlesshellip ldquoTaper Raterdquo too steep here at Approach Terminal (about 13 shown)

Guardrail requires 115 Max Taper Rate per SPI Part I

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereAnswerhellip YES

Third issuehellipldquoBarrier Setbackrdquo requirement likely not satisfied

per FDM Table 21542(5 feet or greater)hellip

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereYES

Fourth issuehellipldquoTrailing Anchoragerdquo not properly extended downstream of hazard

25-foot Requirement SPI C1 amp lsquoLONrsquo Design Tool (Excel)hellip

Answerhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereYES

Fourth issuehellipldquoTrailing Anchoragerdquo not properly extended downstream of hazard

25-foot Requirement SPI C1 amp lsquoLONrsquo Design Tool (Excel)hellip

AnswerhellipFrom lsquoLength of Needrsquo Excel Sheethellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Crash Cushion Index 544-001

Approach Terminals Solution 1lsquoCrash Cushionrsquobull ldquoSystem Widthrdquo ndash

lsquoWidersquo per SPI 544-001 Part C

bull ldquoLength Restrictionrdquo - per SPI 544-001 Part F

bull Contact Central Office for guidance

Note Define Crash Cushion with provided CADD cellhellipldquoSummary of Permanent Crash Cushions Tablerdquo

Guardrail Index 536-001 Crash Cushion Index 544-001

Approach Terminals Solution 1lsquoCrash Cushionrsquobull Guardrail ldquoreduced

post spacingrdquo to reduce required hazard setback per FDM Table 21542

bull Again contact Central Office for guidance for such limited space

Concrete Barrier Index 521-001 Crash Cushion 544-001

Approach Terminals Solution 2lsquoConcrete Barrierrsquo amp lsquoCrash Cushionrsquo

bull Requires project-specific design

bull Contact Central Office for guidance for such limited space

Questions

Richard Stepp PEStandard Plans Engineer

Central Office Roadway Design(850) 414-4313

richardsteppdotstateflus

Standard Plans Single-Slope Barriers

Page 2: Roadside Barriers - MASH Implementation Update & Design ... · Roadside Barriers - Lessons Learned 1. GUARDRAIL Standard Plans, Index 536-001 2. CONCRETE BARRIER Standard Plans, Index

Roadside Barriers - Lessons Learned

1 GUARDRAIL Standard Plans Index 536-001

2 CONCRETE BARRIER Standard Plans Index 521-001

3 PIER PROTECTION BARRIER Standard Plans Index 521-002

Roadside Barriers - Lessons Learned

Design is generally governed by

1 FDOT Design Manual (FDM)httpswwwfdotgovroadwayfdmdefaultshtm

Roadside Barriers - Lessons Learned

Design is generally governed by

2 FDOT Standard Planshttpswwwfdotgovdesignstandardplans

Roadside Barriers - Lessons Learned

Design is generally governed by

3 Standard Plans Instructionshttpswwwfdotgovdesignstandardplans

Roadside Barriers - Lessons Learned

Design is generally governed by

4 Standard Specificationshttpswwwfdotgovprogrammanagement

implementedspecbooksdefaultshtm

Grading Any issues here

Guardrail Index 536-001

Answerhellip

YES

bull Front slope looks too steep

bull Slope break likely too close to post

Photo Credit Bill Fitzgerald PEKLS Engineering LLC

Grading lsquoStandard Postrsquo Requirements

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheet 6

bull Front slope must be 12 or flatter

bull Slope break must be 2 feet behind postUnless

Grading lsquoDeep Postrsquo Requirements

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheet 6

bull If lsquoDeep Postrsquo is called for slope break may be located at Center Line of post

bull STILL Front slope must be 12 or flatterNote Unique Pay Item 536-7-1

Guardrail Index 536-001

Shoulder Widens Any issue here

Answerhellip YESbull ldquoTaper Raterdquo requirement is violatedbull Per Standard Plans Instructions (SPI) Part I

bull Design Speed le 45 mph requires 110 Maxbull Design Speed gt 45mph requires 115 Max

Single Face to Double Face Any Issue

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheet 9

Answerhellip

YES

bull ldquoTrailing Anchoragerdquo Standard is not used here (not detailed this way)

Index 536-001 does not show this as a Trailing Anchorage scenario and the details are not compatible or required

Single Face to Double Face Solution

Guardrail Index 536-001

Call for a Standard ldquoFlared End Unitrdquo (included with General Guardrail Pay Item) More guidance provided in next yearrsquos eBook

bull No ldquoTrailing Anchoragerdquo

bull Just call out Begin and End of guardrail types (on face closest to traveled way)

CRT System (Radial) Any issue here

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 11 amp 12

AnswerhellipYES

First IssueObstruction is in the ldquoClear Area Limitrdquo per Standard Plans

(Controlled Release Terminal)

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 11 amp 12

CRT System (Radial)AnswerhellipYES

First IssueObstruction is in the ldquoClear Area Limitrdquo per Standard Plans

Photo Credit Bill Fitzgerald PEKLS Engineering LLC

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 11 amp 12

bull ldquoClear Areardquo Required (15rsquox30rsquo)

bull ldquoClear Areardquo is free of obstructions and has 12 Slope Max

CRT System (Radial) From Standard Planshellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 11 amp 12

Requires 25-footlinear End TreatmentPer Standard Plans

(12rsquo-6rdquo Shown)

CRT System (Radial) Any other issue here

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 11 amp 12

bull 25-foot linear End Treatment required

bull If this is not possible due limited space use a lsquovariationrsquo for General Radial Guardrail (Not CRT)(No breakaway posts)

CRT System (Radial) Per Standard Planshellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheet 20

Pipe Rail Callouts Any issue hereAnswerhellip YES

Pipe Rail must terminate outside of End Treatments per SPI Part E and Standard PlansSolution

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 13-15

Rigid Barrier Connections End Shielding

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 13-15

Rigid Barrier Connection Any Issue HereAnswerhellip YES

asymp13 foot overlap with barrier is no longer Standard

(Overlap now only 7frac14rdquo Since FY2017-18 Standards for newsingle-faced guardrail)

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 13-15

Rigid Barrier Connection Any Issues HereYES

asymp13 foot overlap with barrier is no longer Standard

(Overlap now only 7frac14rdquo Since FY2017-18 Standards for newsingle-faced guardrail)

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 13-15

Rigid Barrier Connection Any Issues Here

Solution

YES

asymp13 foot overlap with barrier is no longer Standard

(Overlap now only 7frac14rdquo Since FY2017-18 Standards for newsingle-faced guardrail)

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8 13-14

Answerhellip

YES

Guardrail system ishellip

not long enough

Rigid Barrier Connection Any issue here

Minimum Length is Length of Approach Transition Connection lsquoLArsquoplus Length of End Treatment lsquoLErsquo

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8 13-14

Rigid Barrier End Shielding Min Length TL-2

lsquoLArsquo 213rsquo

+lsquoLErsquo 406rsquo

=

62rsquo

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8 13-14

Rigid Barrier End Shielding Min Length TL-2

lsquoLArsquo 213rsquo

+lsquoLErsquo 406rsquo

=

62rsquo

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8 13-14

Rigid Barrier End Shielding Min Length TL-3

lsquoLArsquo 306rsquo

+lsquoLErsquo 531rsquo

=

84rsquo

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8 13-14

Rigid Barrier End Shielding Min Length TL-3

lsquoLArsquo 306rsquo

+lsquoLErsquo 531rsquo

=

84rsquoNOTE If these lengths are not possible due to limited space consider the use of a Crash Cushion or a project-specific lsquovariationrsquo to fit the best barrier system possible

Contact Central Office for assistance

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Any issues hereAnswerhellip YES

1 Flared terminals not permitted per RDB18-02

2 Curbed conditions require parallel Approach Terminals per Standard Plans ampSPI Part C3 Approach Terminals require lsquoType Ersquo Curb

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals

From Standard Planshellip

Answerhellip YES

1 Flared terminals not permitted per RDB18-02

2 Curbed conditions require parallel Approach Terminals per Standard Plans ampSPI Part C3 Approach Terminals require lsquoType Ersquo Curb

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Solution

1 Flared terminals not permitted per RDB18-02

2 Curbed conditions require parallel Approach Terminals per Standard Plans

3 Approach Terminals require lsquoType Ersquo Curb

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Any issues hereYES Wrong

First issuehellipFront slope break should be 6 feet behind guardrail face at post 1 per the Standards (110 Max)

Second issuehellipMisc Asphalt should extend 10 feet upstream of post 1 per Standards

Answerhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach TerminalsYES Wrong

First issuehellipFront slope break should be 6 feet behind guardrail face at post 1 per the Standards (110 Min)

Second issuehellipMisc Asphalt should extend 10 feet upstream of post 1 per Standards

Answerhellip

From Standard Planshellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach TerminalsYES Wrong

First issuehellipFront slope break should be 6 feet behind guardrail face at post 1 per the Standards (110 Min)

Second issuehellipMisc Asphalt should extend 10 feet upstream of post 1 per Standards

Answerhellip

Example of Poor Slope Break Location (and steep slope not shielded)

Photo Credit Bill Fitzgerald PE

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach TerminalsYES Wrong

First issuehellipFront slope break should be 6 feet behind guardrail face at post 1 per the Standards (110 Min)

Second issuehellipMisc Asphalt should extend 10 feet upstream of post 1 per Standards

Answerhellip

Example of Poor Grading (The reason for Misc Asphalt requirement)

Photo Credit Bill Fitzgerald PE

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals SolutionYES Wrong

First issuehellipFront slope break should be 6 feet behind guardrail face at post 1 per the Standards (110 Min)

Second issuehellipMisc Asphalt should extend 10 feet upstream of post 1 per Standards

Answerhellip

Correctedhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Any issues hereYES Wrong

First issuehellipTrees are within the Approach Terminalrsquos clear area in the Standard Plans (where a clear 110 slope required)

Second issuehellipTree violates barrier setback per FDM Table 21542

Answerhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Any issues hereYES Wrong

First issuehellipTrees are within the Approach Terminalrsquos clear area in the Standard Plans (where a clear 110 slope required)

Second issuehellipTree violates barrier setback per FDM Table 21542

Answerhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach TerminalsYES Wrong

First issuehellipTrees are within the Approach Terminalrsquos clear area in the Standard Plans (where a clear 110 slope required)

From Standard Planshellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals

CREDIT VIRGINIA DOT ndash SKT Crash Test Published October 2016

httpswwwyoutubecomwatchv=OsKlfatcjogampfeature=youtube

httpswwwyoutubecomwatchv=h7tct7Oo9-8ampfeature=youtube

YES Wrong

First issuehellipTrees are within the Approach Terminalrsquos clear area in the Standard Plans (where a clear 110 slope required)

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals

CREDIT VIRGINIA DOT ndash SKT Crash Test Published October 2016

httpswwwyoutubecomwatchv=74ImLTY-PhUampfeature=youtube

YES Wrong

First issuehellipTrees are within the Approach Terminalrsquos clear area in the Standard Plans (where a clear 110 slope required)

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach TerminalsYES Wrong

First issuehellipTrees are within the Approach Terminalrsquos clear area in the Standard Plans (where a clear 110 slope required)

From Standard Planshellip

Guardrail Index 536-001

YES Wrong

Second issuehellipTree violates barrier setback per FDM Table 21542

Guardrail Index 536-001

YES Wrong

Second issuehellipTree violates barrier setback per FDM Table 21542

From FDMhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Any issue hereYES Wrong

First issuehellipPerpendicular guardrail is not proven crashworthybull No end treatmentsbull Violates ldquotaper raterdquo

requirements of SPI Part I (big time)

bull Requires shielding if within Clear Zone

Answerhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Any issue hereYES Wrong

Second issuehellipPerpendicular guardrail within the Approach Terminalrsquos clear area in the Standard Plans (where a clear 110 slope required)

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Any issue hereYES Wrong

Third issuehellipPerpendicular guardrail violates barrier setback per FDM Table 21542

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Solution 1

REMOVE theperpendicularGuardrail

Orhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Solution 2

1 Extend Guardrail to meet Length of Need per SPI Part B (Excel lsquoDesign Toolrsquo) which is Roadside Design Guide Eq 5-3

2 Meet minimum barrier setback per FDM Table 21542 (5 feet for general guardrail)

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Final Case StudyAssumptionsbull Design Speed

50 mph

bull Piers designed to withstand 600 kip impact load per FDM215454(Pier Protection Barrier notRequired)

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereAnswerhellip YES

First issuehellipPiers NOT shielded

ldquoLength of Needrdquo NOT met per SPI Part B (Excel Design Tool)

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereAnswerhellip YES

First issuehellipPiers NOT shielded

ldquoLength of Needrdquo NOT met per SPI Part B (Excel Design Tool)

Piers are behind the ldquogatingrdquo(break-away) portion of Approach Terminal

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereYES

Second issuehellipFlared Terminal usage on hold per RDB18-02

Regardlesshellip ldquoTaper Raterdquo too steep here at Approach Terminal (about 13 shown)

Guardrail requires 115 Max Taper Rate per SPI Part I

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereAnswerhellip YES

Third issuehellipldquoBarrier Setbackrdquo requirement likely not satisfied

per FDM Table 21542(5 feet or greater)hellip

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereYES

Fourth issuehellipldquoTrailing Anchoragerdquo not properly extended downstream of hazard

25-foot Requirement SPI C1 amp lsquoLONrsquo Design Tool (Excel)hellip

Answerhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereYES

Fourth issuehellipldquoTrailing Anchoragerdquo not properly extended downstream of hazard

25-foot Requirement SPI C1 amp lsquoLONrsquo Design Tool (Excel)hellip

AnswerhellipFrom lsquoLength of Needrsquo Excel Sheethellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Crash Cushion Index 544-001

Approach Terminals Solution 1lsquoCrash Cushionrsquobull ldquoSystem Widthrdquo ndash

lsquoWidersquo per SPI 544-001 Part C

bull ldquoLength Restrictionrdquo - per SPI 544-001 Part F

bull Contact Central Office for guidance

Note Define Crash Cushion with provided CADD cellhellipldquoSummary of Permanent Crash Cushions Tablerdquo

Guardrail Index 536-001 Crash Cushion Index 544-001

Approach Terminals Solution 1lsquoCrash Cushionrsquobull Guardrail ldquoreduced

post spacingrdquo to reduce required hazard setback per FDM Table 21542

bull Again contact Central Office for guidance for such limited space

Concrete Barrier Index 521-001 Crash Cushion 544-001

Approach Terminals Solution 2lsquoConcrete Barrierrsquo amp lsquoCrash Cushionrsquo

bull Requires project-specific design

bull Contact Central Office for guidance for such limited space

Questions

Richard Stepp PEStandard Plans Engineer

Central Office Roadway Design(850) 414-4313

richardsteppdotstateflus

Standard Plans Single-Slope Barriers

Page 3: Roadside Barriers - MASH Implementation Update & Design ... · Roadside Barriers - Lessons Learned 1. GUARDRAIL Standard Plans, Index 536-001 2. CONCRETE BARRIER Standard Plans, Index

Roadside Barriers - Lessons Learned

Design is generally governed by

1 FDOT Design Manual (FDM)httpswwwfdotgovroadwayfdmdefaultshtm

Roadside Barriers - Lessons Learned

Design is generally governed by

2 FDOT Standard Planshttpswwwfdotgovdesignstandardplans

Roadside Barriers - Lessons Learned

Design is generally governed by

3 Standard Plans Instructionshttpswwwfdotgovdesignstandardplans

Roadside Barriers - Lessons Learned

Design is generally governed by

4 Standard Specificationshttpswwwfdotgovprogrammanagement

implementedspecbooksdefaultshtm

Grading Any issues here

Guardrail Index 536-001

Answerhellip

YES

bull Front slope looks too steep

bull Slope break likely too close to post

Photo Credit Bill Fitzgerald PEKLS Engineering LLC

Grading lsquoStandard Postrsquo Requirements

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheet 6

bull Front slope must be 12 or flatter

bull Slope break must be 2 feet behind postUnless

Grading lsquoDeep Postrsquo Requirements

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheet 6

bull If lsquoDeep Postrsquo is called for slope break may be located at Center Line of post

bull STILL Front slope must be 12 or flatterNote Unique Pay Item 536-7-1

Guardrail Index 536-001

Shoulder Widens Any issue here

Answerhellip YESbull ldquoTaper Raterdquo requirement is violatedbull Per Standard Plans Instructions (SPI) Part I

bull Design Speed le 45 mph requires 110 Maxbull Design Speed gt 45mph requires 115 Max

Single Face to Double Face Any Issue

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheet 9

Answerhellip

YES

bull ldquoTrailing Anchoragerdquo Standard is not used here (not detailed this way)

Index 536-001 does not show this as a Trailing Anchorage scenario and the details are not compatible or required

Single Face to Double Face Solution

Guardrail Index 536-001

Call for a Standard ldquoFlared End Unitrdquo (included with General Guardrail Pay Item) More guidance provided in next yearrsquos eBook

bull No ldquoTrailing Anchoragerdquo

bull Just call out Begin and End of guardrail types (on face closest to traveled way)

CRT System (Radial) Any issue here

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 11 amp 12

AnswerhellipYES

First IssueObstruction is in the ldquoClear Area Limitrdquo per Standard Plans

(Controlled Release Terminal)

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 11 amp 12

CRT System (Radial)AnswerhellipYES

First IssueObstruction is in the ldquoClear Area Limitrdquo per Standard Plans

Photo Credit Bill Fitzgerald PEKLS Engineering LLC

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 11 amp 12

bull ldquoClear Areardquo Required (15rsquox30rsquo)

bull ldquoClear Areardquo is free of obstructions and has 12 Slope Max

CRT System (Radial) From Standard Planshellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 11 amp 12

Requires 25-footlinear End TreatmentPer Standard Plans

(12rsquo-6rdquo Shown)

CRT System (Radial) Any other issue here

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 11 amp 12

bull 25-foot linear End Treatment required

bull If this is not possible due limited space use a lsquovariationrsquo for General Radial Guardrail (Not CRT)(No breakaway posts)

CRT System (Radial) Per Standard Planshellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheet 20

Pipe Rail Callouts Any issue hereAnswerhellip YES

Pipe Rail must terminate outside of End Treatments per SPI Part E and Standard PlansSolution

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 13-15

Rigid Barrier Connections End Shielding

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 13-15

Rigid Barrier Connection Any Issue HereAnswerhellip YES

asymp13 foot overlap with barrier is no longer Standard

(Overlap now only 7frac14rdquo Since FY2017-18 Standards for newsingle-faced guardrail)

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 13-15

Rigid Barrier Connection Any Issues HereYES

asymp13 foot overlap with barrier is no longer Standard

(Overlap now only 7frac14rdquo Since FY2017-18 Standards for newsingle-faced guardrail)

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 13-15

Rigid Barrier Connection Any Issues Here

Solution

YES

asymp13 foot overlap with barrier is no longer Standard

(Overlap now only 7frac14rdquo Since FY2017-18 Standards for newsingle-faced guardrail)

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8 13-14

Answerhellip

YES

Guardrail system ishellip

not long enough

Rigid Barrier Connection Any issue here

Minimum Length is Length of Approach Transition Connection lsquoLArsquoplus Length of End Treatment lsquoLErsquo

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8 13-14

Rigid Barrier End Shielding Min Length TL-2

lsquoLArsquo 213rsquo

+lsquoLErsquo 406rsquo

=

62rsquo

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8 13-14

Rigid Barrier End Shielding Min Length TL-2

lsquoLArsquo 213rsquo

+lsquoLErsquo 406rsquo

=

62rsquo

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8 13-14

Rigid Barrier End Shielding Min Length TL-3

lsquoLArsquo 306rsquo

+lsquoLErsquo 531rsquo

=

84rsquo

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8 13-14

Rigid Barrier End Shielding Min Length TL-3

lsquoLArsquo 306rsquo

+lsquoLErsquo 531rsquo

=

84rsquoNOTE If these lengths are not possible due to limited space consider the use of a Crash Cushion or a project-specific lsquovariationrsquo to fit the best barrier system possible

Contact Central Office for assistance

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Any issues hereAnswerhellip YES

1 Flared terminals not permitted per RDB18-02

2 Curbed conditions require parallel Approach Terminals per Standard Plans ampSPI Part C3 Approach Terminals require lsquoType Ersquo Curb

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals

From Standard Planshellip

Answerhellip YES

1 Flared terminals not permitted per RDB18-02

2 Curbed conditions require parallel Approach Terminals per Standard Plans ampSPI Part C3 Approach Terminals require lsquoType Ersquo Curb

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Solution

1 Flared terminals not permitted per RDB18-02

2 Curbed conditions require parallel Approach Terminals per Standard Plans

3 Approach Terminals require lsquoType Ersquo Curb

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Any issues hereYES Wrong

First issuehellipFront slope break should be 6 feet behind guardrail face at post 1 per the Standards (110 Max)

Second issuehellipMisc Asphalt should extend 10 feet upstream of post 1 per Standards

Answerhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach TerminalsYES Wrong

First issuehellipFront slope break should be 6 feet behind guardrail face at post 1 per the Standards (110 Min)

Second issuehellipMisc Asphalt should extend 10 feet upstream of post 1 per Standards

Answerhellip

From Standard Planshellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach TerminalsYES Wrong

First issuehellipFront slope break should be 6 feet behind guardrail face at post 1 per the Standards (110 Min)

Second issuehellipMisc Asphalt should extend 10 feet upstream of post 1 per Standards

Answerhellip

Example of Poor Slope Break Location (and steep slope not shielded)

Photo Credit Bill Fitzgerald PE

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach TerminalsYES Wrong

First issuehellipFront slope break should be 6 feet behind guardrail face at post 1 per the Standards (110 Min)

Second issuehellipMisc Asphalt should extend 10 feet upstream of post 1 per Standards

Answerhellip

Example of Poor Grading (The reason for Misc Asphalt requirement)

Photo Credit Bill Fitzgerald PE

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals SolutionYES Wrong

First issuehellipFront slope break should be 6 feet behind guardrail face at post 1 per the Standards (110 Min)

Second issuehellipMisc Asphalt should extend 10 feet upstream of post 1 per Standards

Answerhellip

Correctedhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Any issues hereYES Wrong

First issuehellipTrees are within the Approach Terminalrsquos clear area in the Standard Plans (where a clear 110 slope required)

Second issuehellipTree violates barrier setback per FDM Table 21542

Answerhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Any issues hereYES Wrong

First issuehellipTrees are within the Approach Terminalrsquos clear area in the Standard Plans (where a clear 110 slope required)

Second issuehellipTree violates barrier setback per FDM Table 21542

Answerhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach TerminalsYES Wrong

First issuehellipTrees are within the Approach Terminalrsquos clear area in the Standard Plans (where a clear 110 slope required)

From Standard Planshellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals

CREDIT VIRGINIA DOT ndash SKT Crash Test Published October 2016

httpswwwyoutubecomwatchv=OsKlfatcjogampfeature=youtube

httpswwwyoutubecomwatchv=h7tct7Oo9-8ampfeature=youtube

YES Wrong

First issuehellipTrees are within the Approach Terminalrsquos clear area in the Standard Plans (where a clear 110 slope required)

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals

CREDIT VIRGINIA DOT ndash SKT Crash Test Published October 2016

httpswwwyoutubecomwatchv=74ImLTY-PhUampfeature=youtube

YES Wrong

First issuehellipTrees are within the Approach Terminalrsquos clear area in the Standard Plans (where a clear 110 slope required)

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach TerminalsYES Wrong

First issuehellipTrees are within the Approach Terminalrsquos clear area in the Standard Plans (where a clear 110 slope required)

From Standard Planshellip

Guardrail Index 536-001

YES Wrong

Second issuehellipTree violates barrier setback per FDM Table 21542

Guardrail Index 536-001

YES Wrong

Second issuehellipTree violates barrier setback per FDM Table 21542

From FDMhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Any issue hereYES Wrong

First issuehellipPerpendicular guardrail is not proven crashworthybull No end treatmentsbull Violates ldquotaper raterdquo

requirements of SPI Part I (big time)

bull Requires shielding if within Clear Zone

Answerhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Any issue hereYES Wrong

Second issuehellipPerpendicular guardrail within the Approach Terminalrsquos clear area in the Standard Plans (where a clear 110 slope required)

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Any issue hereYES Wrong

Third issuehellipPerpendicular guardrail violates barrier setback per FDM Table 21542

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Solution 1

REMOVE theperpendicularGuardrail

Orhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Solution 2

1 Extend Guardrail to meet Length of Need per SPI Part B (Excel lsquoDesign Toolrsquo) which is Roadside Design Guide Eq 5-3

2 Meet minimum barrier setback per FDM Table 21542 (5 feet for general guardrail)

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Final Case StudyAssumptionsbull Design Speed

50 mph

bull Piers designed to withstand 600 kip impact load per FDM215454(Pier Protection Barrier notRequired)

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereAnswerhellip YES

First issuehellipPiers NOT shielded

ldquoLength of Needrdquo NOT met per SPI Part B (Excel Design Tool)

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereAnswerhellip YES

First issuehellipPiers NOT shielded

ldquoLength of Needrdquo NOT met per SPI Part B (Excel Design Tool)

Piers are behind the ldquogatingrdquo(break-away) portion of Approach Terminal

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereYES

Second issuehellipFlared Terminal usage on hold per RDB18-02

Regardlesshellip ldquoTaper Raterdquo too steep here at Approach Terminal (about 13 shown)

Guardrail requires 115 Max Taper Rate per SPI Part I

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereAnswerhellip YES

Third issuehellipldquoBarrier Setbackrdquo requirement likely not satisfied

per FDM Table 21542(5 feet or greater)hellip

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereYES

Fourth issuehellipldquoTrailing Anchoragerdquo not properly extended downstream of hazard

25-foot Requirement SPI C1 amp lsquoLONrsquo Design Tool (Excel)hellip

Answerhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereYES

Fourth issuehellipldquoTrailing Anchoragerdquo not properly extended downstream of hazard

25-foot Requirement SPI C1 amp lsquoLONrsquo Design Tool (Excel)hellip

AnswerhellipFrom lsquoLength of Needrsquo Excel Sheethellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Crash Cushion Index 544-001

Approach Terminals Solution 1lsquoCrash Cushionrsquobull ldquoSystem Widthrdquo ndash

lsquoWidersquo per SPI 544-001 Part C

bull ldquoLength Restrictionrdquo - per SPI 544-001 Part F

bull Contact Central Office for guidance

Note Define Crash Cushion with provided CADD cellhellipldquoSummary of Permanent Crash Cushions Tablerdquo

Guardrail Index 536-001 Crash Cushion Index 544-001

Approach Terminals Solution 1lsquoCrash Cushionrsquobull Guardrail ldquoreduced

post spacingrdquo to reduce required hazard setback per FDM Table 21542

bull Again contact Central Office for guidance for such limited space

Concrete Barrier Index 521-001 Crash Cushion 544-001

Approach Terminals Solution 2lsquoConcrete Barrierrsquo amp lsquoCrash Cushionrsquo

bull Requires project-specific design

bull Contact Central Office for guidance for such limited space

Questions

Richard Stepp PEStandard Plans Engineer

Central Office Roadway Design(850) 414-4313

richardsteppdotstateflus

Standard Plans Single-Slope Barriers

Page 4: Roadside Barriers - MASH Implementation Update & Design ... · Roadside Barriers - Lessons Learned 1. GUARDRAIL Standard Plans, Index 536-001 2. CONCRETE BARRIER Standard Plans, Index

Roadside Barriers - Lessons Learned

Design is generally governed by

2 FDOT Standard Planshttpswwwfdotgovdesignstandardplans

Roadside Barriers - Lessons Learned

Design is generally governed by

3 Standard Plans Instructionshttpswwwfdotgovdesignstandardplans

Roadside Barriers - Lessons Learned

Design is generally governed by

4 Standard Specificationshttpswwwfdotgovprogrammanagement

implementedspecbooksdefaultshtm

Grading Any issues here

Guardrail Index 536-001

Answerhellip

YES

bull Front slope looks too steep

bull Slope break likely too close to post

Photo Credit Bill Fitzgerald PEKLS Engineering LLC

Grading lsquoStandard Postrsquo Requirements

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheet 6

bull Front slope must be 12 or flatter

bull Slope break must be 2 feet behind postUnless

Grading lsquoDeep Postrsquo Requirements

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheet 6

bull If lsquoDeep Postrsquo is called for slope break may be located at Center Line of post

bull STILL Front slope must be 12 or flatterNote Unique Pay Item 536-7-1

Guardrail Index 536-001

Shoulder Widens Any issue here

Answerhellip YESbull ldquoTaper Raterdquo requirement is violatedbull Per Standard Plans Instructions (SPI) Part I

bull Design Speed le 45 mph requires 110 Maxbull Design Speed gt 45mph requires 115 Max

Single Face to Double Face Any Issue

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheet 9

Answerhellip

YES

bull ldquoTrailing Anchoragerdquo Standard is not used here (not detailed this way)

Index 536-001 does not show this as a Trailing Anchorage scenario and the details are not compatible or required

Single Face to Double Face Solution

Guardrail Index 536-001

Call for a Standard ldquoFlared End Unitrdquo (included with General Guardrail Pay Item) More guidance provided in next yearrsquos eBook

bull No ldquoTrailing Anchoragerdquo

bull Just call out Begin and End of guardrail types (on face closest to traveled way)

CRT System (Radial) Any issue here

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 11 amp 12

AnswerhellipYES

First IssueObstruction is in the ldquoClear Area Limitrdquo per Standard Plans

(Controlled Release Terminal)

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 11 amp 12

CRT System (Radial)AnswerhellipYES

First IssueObstruction is in the ldquoClear Area Limitrdquo per Standard Plans

Photo Credit Bill Fitzgerald PEKLS Engineering LLC

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 11 amp 12

bull ldquoClear Areardquo Required (15rsquox30rsquo)

bull ldquoClear Areardquo is free of obstructions and has 12 Slope Max

CRT System (Radial) From Standard Planshellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 11 amp 12

Requires 25-footlinear End TreatmentPer Standard Plans

(12rsquo-6rdquo Shown)

CRT System (Radial) Any other issue here

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 11 amp 12

bull 25-foot linear End Treatment required

bull If this is not possible due limited space use a lsquovariationrsquo for General Radial Guardrail (Not CRT)(No breakaway posts)

CRT System (Radial) Per Standard Planshellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheet 20

Pipe Rail Callouts Any issue hereAnswerhellip YES

Pipe Rail must terminate outside of End Treatments per SPI Part E and Standard PlansSolution

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 13-15

Rigid Barrier Connections End Shielding

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 13-15

Rigid Barrier Connection Any Issue HereAnswerhellip YES

asymp13 foot overlap with barrier is no longer Standard

(Overlap now only 7frac14rdquo Since FY2017-18 Standards for newsingle-faced guardrail)

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 13-15

Rigid Barrier Connection Any Issues HereYES

asymp13 foot overlap with barrier is no longer Standard

(Overlap now only 7frac14rdquo Since FY2017-18 Standards for newsingle-faced guardrail)

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 13-15

Rigid Barrier Connection Any Issues Here

Solution

YES

asymp13 foot overlap with barrier is no longer Standard

(Overlap now only 7frac14rdquo Since FY2017-18 Standards for newsingle-faced guardrail)

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8 13-14

Answerhellip

YES

Guardrail system ishellip

not long enough

Rigid Barrier Connection Any issue here

Minimum Length is Length of Approach Transition Connection lsquoLArsquoplus Length of End Treatment lsquoLErsquo

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8 13-14

Rigid Barrier End Shielding Min Length TL-2

lsquoLArsquo 213rsquo

+lsquoLErsquo 406rsquo

=

62rsquo

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8 13-14

Rigid Barrier End Shielding Min Length TL-2

lsquoLArsquo 213rsquo

+lsquoLErsquo 406rsquo

=

62rsquo

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8 13-14

Rigid Barrier End Shielding Min Length TL-3

lsquoLArsquo 306rsquo

+lsquoLErsquo 531rsquo

=

84rsquo

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8 13-14

Rigid Barrier End Shielding Min Length TL-3

lsquoLArsquo 306rsquo

+lsquoLErsquo 531rsquo

=

84rsquoNOTE If these lengths are not possible due to limited space consider the use of a Crash Cushion or a project-specific lsquovariationrsquo to fit the best barrier system possible

Contact Central Office for assistance

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Any issues hereAnswerhellip YES

1 Flared terminals not permitted per RDB18-02

2 Curbed conditions require parallel Approach Terminals per Standard Plans ampSPI Part C3 Approach Terminals require lsquoType Ersquo Curb

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals

From Standard Planshellip

Answerhellip YES

1 Flared terminals not permitted per RDB18-02

2 Curbed conditions require parallel Approach Terminals per Standard Plans ampSPI Part C3 Approach Terminals require lsquoType Ersquo Curb

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Solution

1 Flared terminals not permitted per RDB18-02

2 Curbed conditions require parallel Approach Terminals per Standard Plans

3 Approach Terminals require lsquoType Ersquo Curb

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Any issues hereYES Wrong

First issuehellipFront slope break should be 6 feet behind guardrail face at post 1 per the Standards (110 Max)

Second issuehellipMisc Asphalt should extend 10 feet upstream of post 1 per Standards

Answerhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach TerminalsYES Wrong

First issuehellipFront slope break should be 6 feet behind guardrail face at post 1 per the Standards (110 Min)

Second issuehellipMisc Asphalt should extend 10 feet upstream of post 1 per Standards

Answerhellip

From Standard Planshellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach TerminalsYES Wrong

First issuehellipFront slope break should be 6 feet behind guardrail face at post 1 per the Standards (110 Min)

Second issuehellipMisc Asphalt should extend 10 feet upstream of post 1 per Standards

Answerhellip

Example of Poor Slope Break Location (and steep slope not shielded)

Photo Credit Bill Fitzgerald PE

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach TerminalsYES Wrong

First issuehellipFront slope break should be 6 feet behind guardrail face at post 1 per the Standards (110 Min)

Second issuehellipMisc Asphalt should extend 10 feet upstream of post 1 per Standards

Answerhellip

Example of Poor Grading (The reason for Misc Asphalt requirement)

Photo Credit Bill Fitzgerald PE

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals SolutionYES Wrong

First issuehellipFront slope break should be 6 feet behind guardrail face at post 1 per the Standards (110 Min)

Second issuehellipMisc Asphalt should extend 10 feet upstream of post 1 per Standards

Answerhellip

Correctedhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Any issues hereYES Wrong

First issuehellipTrees are within the Approach Terminalrsquos clear area in the Standard Plans (where a clear 110 slope required)

Second issuehellipTree violates barrier setback per FDM Table 21542

Answerhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Any issues hereYES Wrong

First issuehellipTrees are within the Approach Terminalrsquos clear area in the Standard Plans (where a clear 110 slope required)

Second issuehellipTree violates barrier setback per FDM Table 21542

Answerhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach TerminalsYES Wrong

First issuehellipTrees are within the Approach Terminalrsquos clear area in the Standard Plans (where a clear 110 slope required)

From Standard Planshellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals

CREDIT VIRGINIA DOT ndash SKT Crash Test Published October 2016

httpswwwyoutubecomwatchv=OsKlfatcjogampfeature=youtube

httpswwwyoutubecomwatchv=h7tct7Oo9-8ampfeature=youtube

YES Wrong

First issuehellipTrees are within the Approach Terminalrsquos clear area in the Standard Plans (where a clear 110 slope required)

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals

CREDIT VIRGINIA DOT ndash SKT Crash Test Published October 2016

httpswwwyoutubecomwatchv=74ImLTY-PhUampfeature=youtube

YES Wrong

First issuehellipTrees are within the Approach Terminalrsquos clear area in the Standard Plans (where a clear 110 slope required)

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach TerminalsYES Wrong

First issuehellipTrees are within the Approach Terminalrsquos clear area in the Standard Plans (where a clear 110 slope required)

From Standard Planshellip

Guardrail Index 536-001

YES Wrong

Second issuehellipTree violates barrier setback per FDM Table 21542

Guardrail Index 536-001

YES Wrong

Second issuehellipTree violates barrier setback per FDM Table 21542

From FDMhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Any issue hereYES Wrong

First issuehellipPerpendicular guardrail is not proven crashworthybull No end treatmentsbull Violates ldquotaper raterdquo

requirements of SPI Part I (big time)

bull Requires shielding if within Clear Zone

Answerhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Any issue hereYES Wrong

Second issuehellipPerpendicular guardrail within the Approach Terminalrsquos clear area in the Standard Plans (where a clear 110 slope required)

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Any issue hereYES Wrong

Third issuehellipPerpendicular guardrail violates barrier setback per FDM Table 21542

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Solution 1

REMOVE theperpendicularGuardrail

Orhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Solution 2

1 Extend Guardrail to meet Length of Need per SPI Part B (Excel lsquoDesign Toolrsquo) which is Roadside Design Guide Eq 5-3

2 Meet minimum barrier setback per FDM Table 21542 (5 feet for general guardrail)

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Final Case StudyAssumptionsbull Design Speed

50 mph

bull Piers designed to withstand 600 kip impact load per FDM215454(Pier Protection Barrier notRequired)

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereAnswerhellip YES

First issuehellipPiers NOT shielded

ldquoLength of Needrdquo NOT met per SPI Part B (Excel Design Tool)

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereAnswerhellip YES

First issuehellipPiers NOT shielded

ldquoLength of Needrdquo NOT met per SPI Part B (Excel Design Tool)

Piers are behind the ldquogatingrdquo(break-away) portion of Approach Terminal

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereYES

Second issuehellipFlared Terminal usage on hold per RDB18-02

Regardlesshellip ldquoTaper Raterdquo too steep here at Approach Terminal (about 13 shown)

Guardrail requires 115 Max Taper Rate per SPI Part I

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereAnswerhellip YES

Third issuehellipldquoBarrier Setbackrdquo requirement likely not satisfied

per FDM Table 21542(5 feet or greater)hellip

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereYES

Fourth issuehellipldquoTrailing Anchoragerdquo not properly extended downstream of hazard

25-foot Requirement SPI C1 amp lsquoLONrsquo Design Tool (Excel)hellip

Answerhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereYES

Fourth issuehellipldquoTrailing Anchoragerdquo not properly extended downstream of hazard

25-foot Requirement SPI C1 amp lsquoLONrsquo Design Tool (Excel)hellip

AnswerhellipFrom lsquoLength of Needrsquo Excel Sheethellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Crash Cushion Index 544-001

Approach Terminals Solution 1lsquoCrash Cushionrsquobull ldquoSystem Widthrdquo ndash

lsquoWidersquo per SPI 544-001 Part C

bull ldquoLength Restrictionrdquo - per SPI 544-001 Part F

bull Contact Central Office for guidance

Note Define Crash Cushion with provided CADD cellhellipldquoSummary of Permanent Crash Cushions Tablerdquo

Guardrail Index 536-001 Crash Cushion Index 544-001

Approach Terminals Solution 1lsquoCrash Cushionrsquobull Guardrail ldquoreduced

post spacingrdquo to reduce required hazard setback per FDM Table 21542

bull Again contact Central Office for guidance for such limited space

Concrete Barrier Index 521-001 Crash Cushion 544-001

Approach Terminals Solution 2lsquoConcrete Barrierrsquo amp lsquoCrash Cushionrsquo

bull Requires project-specific design

bull Contact Central Office for guidance for such limited space

Questions

Richard Stepp PEStandard Plans Engineer

Central Office Roadway Design(850) 414-4313

richardsteppdotstateflus

Standard Plans Single-Slope Barriers

Page 5: Roadside Barriers - MASH Implementation Update & Design ... · Roadside Barriers - Lessons Learned 1. GUARDRAIL Standard Plans, Index 536-001 2. CONCRETE BARRIER Standard Plans, Index

Roadside Barriers - Lessons Learned

Design is generally governed by

3 Standard Plans Instructionshttpswwwfdotgovdesignstandardplans

Roadside Barriers - Lessons Learned

Design is generally governed by

4 Standard Specificationshttpswwwfdotgovprogrammanagement

implementedspecbooksdefaultshtm

Grading Any issues here

Guardrail Index 536-001

Answerhellip

YES

bull Front slope looks too steep

bull Slope break likely too close to post

Photo Credit Bill Fitzgerald PEKLS Engineering LLC

Grading lsquoStandard Postrsquo Requirements

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheet 6

bull Front slope must be 12 or flatter

bull Slope break must be 2 feet behind postUnless

Grading lsquoDeep Postrsquo Requirements

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheet 6

bull If lsquoDeep Postrsquo is called for slope break may be located at Center Line of post

bull STILL Front slope must be 12 or flatterNote Unique Pay Item 536-7-1

Guardrail Index 536-001

Shoulder Widens Any issue here

Answerhellip YESbull ldquoTaper Raterdquo requirement is violatedbull Per Standard Plans Instructions (SPI) Part I

bull Design Speed le 45 mph requires 110 Maxbull Design Speed gt 45mph requires 115 Max

Single Face to Double Face Any Issue

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheet 9

Answerhellip

YES

bull ldquoTrailing Anchoragerdquo Standard is not used here (not detailed this way)

Index 536-001 does not show this as a Trailing Anchorage scenario and the details are not compatible or required

Single Face to Double Face Solution

Guardrail Index 536-001

Call for a Standard ldquoFlared End Unitrdquo (included with General Guardrail Pay Item) More guidance provided in next yearrsquos eBook

bull No ldquoTrailing Anchoragerdquo

bull Just call out Begin and End of guardrail types (on face closest to traveled way)

CRT System (Radial) Any issue here

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 11 amp 12

AnswerhellipYES

First IssueObstruction is in the ldquoClear Area Limitrdquo per Standard Plans

(Controlled Release Terminal)

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 11 amp 12

CRT System (Radial)AnswerhellipYES

First IssueObstruction is in the ldquoClear Area Limitrdquo per Standard Plans

Photo Credit Bill Fitzgerald PEKLS Engineering LLC

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 11 amp 12

bull ldquoClear Areardquo Required (15rsquox30rsquo)

bull ldquoClear Areardquo is free of obstructions and has 12 Slope Max

CRT System (Radial) From Standard Planshellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 11 amp 12

Requires 25-footlinear End TreatmentPer Standard Plans

(12rsquo-6rdquo Shown)

CRT System (Radial) Any other issue here

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 11 amp 12

bull 25-foot linear End Treatment required

bull If this is not possible due limited space use a lsquovariationrsquo for General Radial Guardrail (Not CRT)(No breakaway posts)

CRT System (Radial) Per Standard Planshellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheet 20

Pipe Rail Callouts Any issue hereAnswerhellip YES

Pipe Rail must terminate outside of End Treatments per SPI Part E and Standard PlansSolution

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 13-15

Rigid Barrier Connections End Shielding

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 13-15

Rigid Barrier Connection Any Issue HereAnswerhellip YES

asymp13 foot overlap with barrier is no longer Standard

(Overlap now only 7frac14rdquo Since FY2017-18 Standards for newsingle-faced guardrail)

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 13-15

Rigid Barrier Connection Any Issues HereYES

asymp13 foot overlap with barrier is no longer Standard

(Overlap now only 7frac14rdquo Since FY2017-18 Standards for newsingle-faced guardrail)

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 13-15

Rigid Barrier Connection Any Issues Here

Solution

YES

asymp13 foot overlap with barrier is no longer Standard

(Overlap now only 7frac14rdquo Since FY2017-18 Standards for newsingle-faced guardrail)

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8 13-14

Answerhellip

YES

Guardrail system ishellip

not long enough

Rigid Barrier Connection Any issue here

Minimum Length is Length of Approach Transition Connection lsquoLArsquoplus Length of End Treatment lsquoLErsquo

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8 13-14

Rigid Barrier End Shielding Min Length TL-2

lsquoLArsquo 213rsquo

+lsquoLErsquo 406rsquo

=

62rsquo

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8 13-14

Rigid Barrier End Shielding Min Length TL-2

lsquoLArsquo 213rsquo

+lsquoLErsquo 406rsquo

=

62rsquo

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8 13-14

Rigid Barrier End Shielding Min Length TL-3

lsquoLArsquo 306rsquo

+lsquoLErsquo 531rsquo

=

84rsquo

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8 13-14

Rigid Barrier End Shielding Min Length TL-3

lsquoLArsquo 306rsquo

+lsquoLErsquo 531rsquo

=

84rsquoNOTE If these lengths are not possible due to limited space consider the use of a Crash Cushion or a project-specific lsquovariationrsquo to fit the best barrier system possible

Contact Central Office for assistance

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Any issues hereAnswerhellip YES

1 Flared terminals not permitted per RDB18-02

2 Curbed conditions require parallel Approach Terminals per Standard Plans ampSPI Part C3 Approach Terminals require lsquoType Ersquo Curb

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals

From Standard Planshellip

Answerhellip YES

1 Flared terminals not permitted per RDB18-02

2 Curbed conditions require parallel Approach Terminals per Standard Plans ampSPI Part C3 Approach Terminals require lsquoType Ersquo Curb

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Solution

1 Flared terminals not permitted per RDB18-02

2 Curbed conditions require parallel Approach Terminals per Standard Plans

3 Approach Terminals require lsquoType Ersquo Curb

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Any issues hereYES Wrong

First issuehellipFront slope break should be 6 feet behind guardrail face at post 1 per the Standards (110 Max)

Second issuehellipMisc Asphalt should extend 10 feet upstream of post 1 per Standards

Answerhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach TerminalsYES Wrong

First issuehellipFront slope break should be 6 feet behind guardrail face at post 1 per the Standards (110 Min)

Second issuehellipMisc Asphalt should extend 10 feet upstream of post 1 per Standards

Answerhellip

From Standard Planshellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach TerminalsYES Wrong

First issuehellipFront slope break should be 6 feet behind guardrail face at post 1 per the Standards (110 Min)

Second issuehellipMisc Asphalt should extend 10 feet upstream of post 1 per Standards

Answerhellip

Example of Poor Slope Break Location (and steep slope not shielded)

Photo Credit Bill Fitzgerald PE

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach TerminalsYES Wrong

First issuehellipFront slope break should be 6 feet behind guardrail face at post 1 per the Standards (110 Min)

Second issuehellipMisc Asphalt should extend 10 feet upstream of post 1 per Standards

Answerhellip

Example of Poor Grading (The reason for Misc Asphalt requirement)

Photo Credit Bill Fitzgerald PE

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals SolutionYES Wrong

First issuehellipFront slope break should be 6 feet behind guardrail face at post 1 per the Standards (110 Min)

Second issuehellipMisc Asphalt should extend 10 feet upstream of post 1 per Standards

Answerhellip

Correctedhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Any issues hereYES Wrong

First issuehellipTrees are within the Approach Terminalrsquos clear area in the Standard Plans (where a clear 110 slope required)

Second issuehellipTree violates barrier setback per FDM Table 21542

Answerhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Any issues hereYES Wrong

First issuehellipTrees are within the Approach Terminalrsquos clear area in the Standard Plans (where a clear 110 slope required)

Second issuehellipTree violates barrier setback per FDM Table 21542

Answerhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach TerminalsYES Wrong

First issuehellipTrees are within the Approach Terminalrsquos clear area in the Standard Plans (where a clear 110 slope required)

From Standard Planshellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals

CREDIT VIRGINIA DOT ndash SKT Crash Test Published October 2016

httpswwwyoutubecomwatchv=OsKlfatcjogampfeature=youtube

httpswwwyoutubecomwatchv=h7tct7Oo9-8ampfeature=youtube

YES Wrong

First issuehellipTrees are within the Approach Terminalrsquos clear area in the Standard Plans (where a clear 110 slope required)

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals

CREDIT VIRGINIA DOT ndash SKT Crash Test Published October 2016

httpswwwyoutubecomwatchv=74ImLTY-PhUampfeature=youtube

YES Wrong

First issuehellipTrees are within the Approach Terminalrsquos clear area in the Standard Plans (where a clear 110 slope required)

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach TerminalsYES Wrong

First issuehellipTrees are within the Approach Terminalrsquos clear area in the Standard Plans (where a clear 110 slope required)

From Standard Planshellip

Guardrail Index 536-001

YES Wrong

Second issuehellipTree violates barrier setback per FDM Table 21542

Guardrail Index 536-001

YES Wrong

Second issuehellipTree violates barrier setback per FDM Table 21542

From FDMhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Any issue hereYES Wrong

First issuehellipPerpendicular guardrail is not proven crashworthybull No end treatmentsbull Violates ldquotaper raterdquo

requirements of SPI Part I (big time)

bull Requires shielding if within Clear Zone

Answerhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Any issue hereYES Wrong

Second issuehellipPerpendicular guardrail within the Approach Terminalrsquos clear area in the Standard Plans (where a clear 110 slope required)

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Any issue hereYES Wrong

Third issuehellipPerpendicular guardrail violates barrier setback per FDM Table 21542

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Solution 1

REMOVE theperpendicularGuardrail

Orhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Solution 2

1 Extend Guardrail to meet Length of Need per SPI Part B (Excel lsquoDesign Toolrsquo) which is Roadside Design Guide Eq 5-3

2 Meet minimum barrier setback per FDM Table 21542 (5 feet for general guardrail)

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Final Case StudyAssumptionsbull Design Speed

50 mph

bull Piers designed to withstand 600 kip impact load per FDM215454(Pier Protection Barrier notRequired)

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereAnswerhellip YES

First issuehellipPiers NOT shielded

ldquoLength of Needrdquo NOT met per SPI Part B (Excel Design Tool)

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereAnswerhellip YES

First issuehellipPiers NOT shielded

ldquoLength of Needrdquo NOT met per SPI Part B (Excel Design Tool)

Piers are behind the ldquogatingrdquo(break-away) portion of Approach Terminal

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereYES

Second issuehellipFlared Terminal usage on hold per RDB18-02

Regardlesshellip ldquoTaper Raterdquo too steep here at Approach Terminal (about 13 shown)

Guardrail requires 115 Max Taper Rate per SPI Part I

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereAnswerhellip YES

Third issuehellipldquoBarrier Setbackrdquo requirement likely not satisfied

per FDM Table 21542(5 feet or greater)hellip

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereYES

Fourth issuehellipldquoTrailing Anchoragerdquo not properly extended downstream of hazard

25-foot Requirement SPI C1 amp lsquoLONrsquo Design Tool (Excel)hellip

Answerhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereYES

Fourth issuehellipldquoTrailing Anchoragerdquo not properly extended downstream of hazard

25-foot Requirement SPI C1 amp lsquoLONrsquo Design Tool (Excel)hellip

AnswerhellipFrom lsquoLength of Needrsquo Excel Sheethellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Crash Cushion Index 544-001

Approach Terminals Solution 1lsquoCrash Cushionrsquobull ldquoSystem Widthrdquo ndash

lsquoWidersquo per SPI 544-001 Part C

bull ldquoLength Restrictionrdquo - per SPI 544-001 Part F

bull Contact Central Office for guidance

Note Define Crash Cushion with provided CADD cellhellipldquoSummary of Permanent Crash Cushions Tablerdquo

Guardrail Index 536-001 Crash Cushion Index 544-001

Approach Terminals Solution 1lsquoCrash Cushionrsquobull Guardrail ldquoreduced

post spacingrdquo to reduce required hazard setback per FDM Table 21542

bull Again contact Central Office for guidance for such limited space

Concrete Barrier Index 521-001 Crash Cushion 544-001

Approach Terminals Solution 2lsquoConcrete Barrierrsquo amp lsquoCrash Cushionrsquo

bull Requires project-specific design

bull Contact Central Office for guidance for such limited space

Questions

Richard Stepp PEStandard Plans Engineer

Central Office Roadway Design(850) 414-4313

richardsteppdotstateflus

Standard Plans Single-Slope Barriers

Page 6: Roadside Barriers - MASH Implementation Update & Design ... · Roadside Barriers - Lessons Learned 1. GUARDRAIL Standard Plans, Index 536-001 2. CONCRETE BARRIER Standard Plans, Index

Roadside Barriers - Lessons Learned

Design is generally governed by

4 Standard Specificationshttpswwwfdotgovprogrammanagement

implementedspecbooksdefaultshtm

Grading Any issues here

Guardrail Index 536-001

Answerhellip

YES

bull Front slope looks too steep

bull Slope break likely too close to post

Photo Credit Bill Fitzgerald PEKLS Engineering LLC

Grading lsquoStandard Postrsquo Requirements

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheet 6

bull Front slope must be 12 or flatter

bull Slope break must be 2 feet behind postUnless

Grading lsquoDeep Postrsquo Requirements

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheet 6

bull If lsquoDeep Postrsquo is called for slope break may be located at Center Line of post

bull STILL Front slope must be 12 or flatterNote Unique Pay Item 536-7-1

Guardrail Index 536-001

Shoulder Widens Any issue here

Answerhellip YESbull ldquoTaper Raterdquo requirement is violatedbull Per Standard Plans Instructions (SPI) Part I

bull Design Speed le 45 mph requires 110 Maxbull Design Speed gt 45mph requires 115 Max

Single Face to Double Face Any Issue

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheet 9

Answerhellip

YES

bull ldquoTrailing Anchoragerdquo Standard is not used here (not detailed this way)

Index 536-001 does not show this as a Trailing Anchorage scenario and the details are not compatible or required

Single Face to Double Face Solution

Guardrail Index 536-001

Call for a Standard ldquoFlared End Unitrdquo (included with General Guardrail Pay Item) More guidance provided in next yearrsquos eBook

bull No ldquoTrailing Anchoragerdquo

bull Just call out Begin and End of guardrail types (on face closest to traveled way)

CRT System (Radial) Any issue here

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 11 amp 12

AnswerhellipYES

First IssueObstruction is in the ldquoClear Area Limitrdquo per Standard Plans

(Controlled Release Terminal)

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 11 amp 12

CRT System (Radial)AnswerhellipYES

First IssueObstruction is in the ldquoClear Area Limitrdquo per Standard Plans

Photo Credit Bill Fitzgerald PEKLS Engineering LLC

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 11 amp 12

bull ldquoClear Areardquo Required (15rsquox30rsquo)

bull ldquoClear Areardquo is free of obstructions and has 12 Slope Max

CRT System (Radial) From Standard Planshellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 11 amp 12

Requires 25-footlinear End TreatmentPer Standard Plans

(12rsquo-6rdquo Shown)

CRT System (Radial) Any other issue here

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 11 amp 12

bull 25-foot linear End Treatment required

bull If this is not possible due limited space use a lsquovariationrsquo for General Radial Guardrail (Not CRT)(No breakaway posts)

CRT System (Radial) Per Standard Planshellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheet 20

Pipe Rail Callouts Any issue hereAnswerhellip YES

Pipe Rail must terminate outside of End Treatments per SPI Part E and Standard PlansSolution

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 13-15

Rigid Barrier Connections End Shielding

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 13-15

Rigid Barrier Connection Any Issue HereAnswerhellip YES

asymp13 foot overlap with barrier is no longer Standard

(Overlap now only 7frac14rdquo Since FY2017-18 Standards for newsingle-faced guardrail)

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 13-15

Rigid Barrier Connection Any Issues HereYES

asymp13 foot overlap with barrier is no longer Standard

(Overlap now only 7frac14rdquo Since FY2017-18 Standards for newsingle-faced guardrail)

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 13-15

Rigid Barrier Connection Any Issues Here

Solution

YES

asymp13 foot overlap with barrier is no longer Standard

(Overlap now only 7frac14rdquo Since FY2017-18 Standards for newsingle-faced guardrail)

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8 13-14

Answerhellip

YES

Guardrail system ishellip

not long enough

Rigid Barrier Connection Any issue here

Minimum Length is Length of Approach Transition Connection lsquoLArsquoplus Length of End Treatment lsquoLErsquo

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8 13-14

Rigid Barrier End Shielding Min Length TL-2

lsquoLArsquo 213rsquo

+lsquoLErsquo 406rsquo

=

62rsquo

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8 13-14

Rigid Barrier End Shielding Min Length TL-2

lsquoLArsquo 213rsquo

+lsquoLErsquo 406rsquo

=

62rsquo

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8 13-14

Rigid Barrier End Shielding Min Length TL-3

lsquoLArsquo 306rsquo

+lsquoLErsquo 531rsquo

=

84rsquo

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8 13-14

Rigid Barrier End Shielding Min Length TL-3

lsquoLArsquo 306rsquo

+lsquoLErsquo 531rsquo

=

84rsquoNOTE If these lengths are not possible due to limited space consider the use of a Crash Cushion or a project-specific lsquovariationrsquo to fit the best barrier system possible

Contact Central Office for assistance

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Any issues hereAnswerhellip YES

1 Flared terminals not permitted per RDB18-02

2 Curbed conditions require parallel Approach Terminals per Standard Plans ampSPI Part C3 Approach Terminals require lsquoType Ersquo Curb

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals

From Standard Planshellip

Answerhellip YES

1 Flared terminals not permitted per RDB18-02

2 Curbed conditions require parallel Approach Terminals per Standard Plans ampSPI Part C3 Approach Terminals require lsquoType Ersquo Curb

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Solution

1 Flared terminals not permitted per RDB18-02

2 Curbed conditions require parallel Approach Terminals per Standard Plans

3 Approach Terminals require lsquoType Ersquo Curb

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Any issues hereYES Wrong

First issuehellipFront slope break should be 6 feet behind guardrail face at post 1 per the Standards (110 Max)

Second issuehellipMisc Asphalt should extend 10 feet upstream of post 1 per Standards

Answerhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach TerminalsYES Wrong

First issuehellipFront slope break should be 6 feet behind guardrail face at post 1 per the Standards (110 Min)

Second issuehellipMisc Asphalt should extend 10 feet upstream of post 1 per Standards

Answerhellip

From Standard Planshellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach TerminalsYES Wrong

First issuehellipFront slope break should be 6 feet behind guardrail face at post 1 per the Standards (110 Min)

Second issuehellipMisc Asphalt should extend 10 feet upstream of post 1 per Standards

Answerhellip

Example of Poor Slope Break Location (and steep slope not shielded)

Photo Credit Bill Fitzgerald PE

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach TerminalsYES Wrong

First issuehellipFront slope break should be 6 feet behind guardrail face at post 1 per the Standards (110 Min)

Second issuehellipMisc Asphalt should extend 10 feet upstream of post 1 per Standards

Answerhellip

Example of Poor Grading (The reason for Misc Asphalt requirement)

Photo Credit Bill Fitzgerald PE

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals SolutionYES Wrong

First issuehellipFront slope break should be 6 feet behind guardrail face at post 1 per the Standards (110 Min)

Second issuehellipMisc Asphalt should extend 10 feet upstream of post 1 per Standards

Answerhellip

Correctedhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Any issues hereYES Wrong

First issuehellipTrees are within the Approach Terminalrsquos clear area in the Standard Plans (where a clear 110 slope required)

Second issuehellipTree violates barrier setback per FDM Table 21542

Answerhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Any issues hereYES Wrong

First issuehellipTrees are within the Approach Terminalrsquos clear area in the Standard Plans (where a clear 110 slope required)

Second issuehellipTree violates barrier setback per FDM Table 21542

Answerhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach TerminalsYES Wrong

First issuehellipTrees are within the Approach Terminalrsquos clear area in the Standard Plans (where a clear 110 slope required)

From Standard Planshellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals

CREDIT VIRGINIA DOT ndash SKT Crash Test Published October 2016

httpswwwyoutubecomwatchv=OsKlfatcjogampfeature=youtube

httpswwwyoutubecomwatchv=h7tct7Oo9-8ampfeature=youtube

YES Wrong

First issuehellipTrees are within the Approach Terminalrsquos clear area in the Standard Plans (where a clear 110 slope required)

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals

CREDIT VIRGINIA DOT ndash SKT Crash Test Published October 2016

httpswwwyoutubecomwatchv=74ImLTY-PhUampfeature=youtube

YES Wrong

First issuehellipTrees are within the Approach Terminalrsquos clear area in the Standard Plans (where a clear 110 slope required)

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach TerminalsYES Wrong

First issuehellipTrees are within the Approach Terminalrsquos clear area in the Standard Plans (where a clear 110 slope required)

From Standard Planshellip

Guardrail Index 536-001

YES Wrong

Second issuehellipTree violates barrier setback per FDM Table 21542

Guardrail Index 536-001

YES Wrong

Second issuehellipTree violates barrier setback per FDM Table 21542

From FDMhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Any issue hereYES Wrong

First issuehellipPerpendicular guardrail is not proven crashworthybull No end treatmentsbull Violates ldquotaper raterdquo

requirements of SPI Part I (big time)

bull Requires shielding if within Clear Zone

Answerhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Any issue hereYES Wrong

Second issuehellipPerpendicular guardrail within the Approach Terminalrsquos clear area in the Standard Plans (where a clear 110 slope required)

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Any issue hereYES Wrong

Third issuehellipPerpendicular guardrail violates barrier setback per FDM Table 21542

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Solution 1

REMOVE theperpendicularGuardrail

Orhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Solution 2

1 Extend Guardrail to meet Length of Need per SPI Part B (Excel lsquoDesign Toolrsquo) which is Roadside Design Guide Eq 5-3

2 Meet minimum barrier setback per FDM Table 21542 (5 feet for general guardrail)

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Final Case StudyAssumptionsbull Design Speed

50 mph

bull Piers designed to withstand 600 kip impact load per FDM215454(Pier Protection Barrier notRequired)

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereAnswerhellip YES

First issuehellipPiers NOT shielded

ldquoLength of Needrdquo NOT met per SPI Part B (Excel Design Tool)

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereAnswerhellip YES

First issuehellipPiers NOT shielded

ldquoLength of Needrdquo NOT met per SPI Part B (Excel Design Tool)

Piers are behind the ldquogatingrdquo(break-away) portion of Approach Terminal

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereYES

Second issuehellipFlared Terminal usage on hold per RDB18-02

Regardlesshellip ldquoTaper Raterdquo too steep here at Approach Terminal (about 13 shown)

Guardrail requires 115 Max Taper Rate per SPI Part I

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereAnswerhellip YES

Third issuehellipldquoBarrier Setbackrdquo requirement likely not satisfied

per FDM Table 21542(5 feet or greater)hellip

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereYES

Fourth issuehellipldquoTrailing Anchoragerdquo not properly extended downstream of hazard

25-foot Requirement SPI C1 amp lsquoLONrsquo Design Tool (Excel)hellip

Answerhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereYES

Fourth issuehellipldquoTrailing Anchoragerdquo not properly extended downstream of hazard

25-foot Requirement SPI C1 amp lsquoLONrsquo Design Tool (Excel)hellip

AnswerhellipFrom lsquoLength of Needrsquo Excel Sheethellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Crash Cushion Index 544-001

Approach Terminals Solution 1lsquoCrash Cushionrsquobull ldquoSystem Widthrdquo ndash

lsquoWidersquo per SPI 544-001 Part C

bull ldquoLength Restrictionrdquo - per SPI 544-001 Part F

bull Contact Central Office for guidance

Note Define Crash Cushion with provided CADD cellhellipldquoSummary of Permanent Crash Cushions Tablerdquo

Guardrail Index 536-001 Crash Cushion Index 544-001

Approach Terminals Solution 1lsquoCrash Cushionrsquobull Guardrail ldquoreduced

post spacingrdquo to reduce required hazard setback per FDM Table 21542

bull Again contact Central Office for guidance for such limited space

Concrete Barrier Index 521-001 Crash Cushion 544-001

Approach Terminals Solution 2lsquoConcrete Barrierrsquo amp lsquoCrash Cushionrsquo

bull Requires project-specific design

bull Contact Central Office for guidance for such limited space

Questions

Richard Stepp PEStandard Plans Engineer

Central Office Roadway Design(850) 414-4313

richardsteppdotstateflus

Standard Plans Single-Slope Barriers

Page 7: Roadside Barriers - MASH Implementation Update & Design ... · Roadside Barriers - Lessons Learned 1. GUARDRAIL Standard Plans, Index 536-001 2. CONCRETE BARRIER Standard Plans, Index

Grading Any issues here

Guardrail Index 536-001

Answerhellip

YES

bull Front slope looks too steep

bull Slope break likely too close to post

Photo Credit Bill Fitzgerald PEKLS Engineering LLC

Grading lsquoStandard Postrsquo Requirements

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheet 6

bull Front slope must be 12 or flatter

bull Slope break must be 2 feet behind postUnless

Grading lsquoDeep Postrsquo Requirements

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheet 6

bull If lsquoDeep Postrsquo is called for slope break may be located at Center Line of post

bull STILL Front slope must be 12 or flatterNote Unique Pay Item 536-7-1

Guardrail Index 536-001

Shoulder Widens Any issue here

Answerhellip YESbull ldquoTaper Raterdquo requirement is violatedbull Per Standard Plans Instructions (SPI) Part I

bull Design Speed le 45 mph requires 110 Maxbull Design Speed gt 45mph requires 115 Max

Single Face to Double Face Any Issue

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheet 9

Answerhellip

YES

bull ldquoTrailing Anchoragerdquo Standard is not used here (not detailed this way)

Index 536-001 does not show this as a Trailing Anchorage scenario and the details are not compatible or required

Single Face to Double Face Solution

Guardrail Index 536-001

Call for a Standard ldquoFlared End Unitrdquo (included with General Guardrail Pay Item) More guidance provided in next yearrsquos eBook

bull No ldquoTrailing Anchoragerdquo

bull Just call out Begin and End of guardrail types (on face closest to traveled way)

CRT System (Radial) Any issue here

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 11 amp 12

AnswerhellipYES

First IssueObstruction is in the ldquoClear Area Limitrdquo per Standard Plans

(Controlled Release Terminal)

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 11 amp 12

CRT System (Radial)AnswerhellipYES

First IssueObstruction is in the ldquoClear Area Limitrdquo per Standard Plans

Photo Credit Bill Fitzgerald PEKLS Engineering LLC

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 11 amp 12

bull ldquoClear Areardquo Required (15rsquox30rsquo)

bull ldquoClear Areardquo is free of obstructions and has 12 Slope Max

CRT System (Radial) From Standard Planshellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 11 amp 12

Requires 25-footlinear End TreatmentPer Standard Plans

(12rsquo-6rdquo Shown)

CRT System (Radial) Any other issue here

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 11 amp 12

bull 25-foot linear End Treatment required

bull If this is not possible due limited space use a lsquovariationrsquo for General Radial Guardrail (Not CRT)(No breakaway posts)

CRT System (Radial) Per Standard Planshellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheet 20

Pipe Rail Callouts Any issue hereAnswerhellip YES

Pipe Rail must terminate outside of End Treatments per SPI Part E and Standard PlansSolution

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 13-15

Rigid Barrier Connections End Shielding

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 13-15

Rigid Barrier Connection Any Issue HereAnswerhellip YES

asymp13 foot overlap with barrier is no longer Standard

(Overlap now only 7frac14rdquo Since FY2017-18 Standards for newsingle-faced guardrail)

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 13-15

Rigid Barrier Connection Any Issues HereYES

asymp13 foot overlap with barrier is no longer Standard

(Overlap now only 7frac14rdquo Since FY2017-18 Standards for newsingle-faced guardrail)

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 13-15

Rigid Barrier Connection Any Issues Here

Solution

YES

asymp13 foot overlap with barrier is no longer Standard

(Overlap now only 7frac14rdquo Since FY2017-18 Standards for newsingle-faced guardrail)

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8 13-14

Answerhellip

YES

Guardrail system ishellip

not long enough

Rigid Barrier Connection Any issue here

Minimum Length is Length of Approach Transition Connection lsquoLArsquoplus Length of End Treatment lsquoLErsquo

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8 13-14

Rigid Barrier End Shielding Min Length TL-2

lsquoLArsquo 213rsquo

+lsquoLErsquo 406rsquo

=

62rsquo

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8 13-14

Rigid Barrier End Shielding Min Length TL-2

lsquoLArsquo 213rsquo

+lsquoLErsquo 406rsquo

=

62rsquo

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8 13-14

Rigid Barrier End Shielding Min Length TL-3

lsquoLArsquo 306rsquo

+lsquoLErsquo 531rsquo

=

84rsquo

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8 13-14

Rigid Barrier End Shielding Min Length TL-3

lsquoLArsquo 306rsquo

+lsquoLErsquo 531rsquo

=

84rsquoNOTE If these lengths are not possible due to limited space consider the use of a Crash Cushion or a project-specific lsquovariationrsquo to fit the best barrier system possible

Contact Central Office for assistance

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Any issues hereAnswerhellip YES

1 Flared terminals not permitted per RDB18-02

2 Curbed conditions require parallel Approach Terminals per Standard Plans ampSPI Part C3 Approach Terminals require lsquoType Ersquo Curb

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals

From Standard Planshellip

Answerhellip YES

1 Flared terminals not permitted per RDB18-02

2 Curbed conditions require parallel Approach Terminals per Standard Plans ampSPI Part C3 Approach Terminals require lsquoType Ersquo Curb

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Solution

1 Flared terminals not permitted per RDB18-02

2 Curbed conditions require parallel Approach Terminals per Standard Plans

3 Approach Terminals require lsquoType Ersquo Curb

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Any issues hereYES Wrong

First issuehellipFront slope break should be 6 feet behind guardrail face at post 1 per the Standards (110 Max)

Second issuehellipMisc Asphalt should extend 10 feet upstream of post 1 per Standards

Answerhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach TerminalsYES Wrong

First issuehellipFront slope break should be 6 feet behind guardrail face at post 1 per the Standards (110 Min)

Second issuehellipMisc Asphalt should extend 10 feet upstream of post 1 per Standards

Answerhellip

From Standard Planshellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach TerminalsYES Wrong

First issuehellipFront slope break should be 6 feet behind guardrail face at post 1 per the Standards (110 Min)

Second issuehellipMisc Asphalt should extend 10 feet upstream of post 1 per Standards

Answerhellip

Example of Poor Slope Break Location (and steep slope not shielded)

Photo Credit Bill Fitzgerald PE

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach TerminalsYES Wrong

First issuehellipFront slope break should be 6 feet behind guardrail face at post 1 per the Standards (110 Min)

Second issuehellipMisc Asphalt should extend 10 feet upstream of post 1 per Standards

Answerhellip

Example of Poor Grading (The reason for Misc Asphalt requirement)

Photo Credit Bill Fitzgerald PE

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals SolutionYES Wrong

First issuehellipFront slope break should be 6 feet behind guardrail face at post 1 per the Standards (110 Min)

Second issuehellipMisc Asphalt should extend 10 feet upstream of post 1 per Standards

Answerhellip

Correctedhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Any issues hereYES Wrong

First issuehellipTrees are within the Approach Terminalrsquos clear area in the Standard Plans (where a clear 110 slope required)

Second issuehellipTree violates barrier setback per FDM Table 21542

Answerhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Any issues hereYES Wrong

First issuehellipTrees are within the Approach Terminalrsquos clear area in the Standard Plans (where a clear 110 slope required)

Second issuehellipTree violates barrier setback per FDM Table 21542

Answerhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach TerminalsYES Wrong

First issuehellipTrees are within the Approach Terminalrsquos clear area in the Standard Plans (where a clear 110 slope required)

From Standard Planshellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals

CREDIT VIRGINIA DOT ndash SKT Crash Test Published October 2016

httpswwwyoutubecomwatchv=OsKlfatcjogampfeature=youtube

httpswwwyoutubecomwatchv=h7tct7Oo9-8ampfeature=youtube

YES Wrong

First issuehellipTrees are within the Approach Terminalrsquos clear area in the Standard Plans (where a clear 110 slope required)

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals

CREDIT VIRGINIA DOT ndash SKT Crash Test Published October 2016

httpswwwyoutubecomwatchv=74ImLTY-PhUampfeature=youtube

YES Wrong

First issuehellipTrees are within the Approach Terminalrsquos clear area in the Standard Plans (where a clear 110 slope required)

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach TerminalsYES Wrong

First issuehellipTrees are within the Approach Terminalrsquos clear area in the Standard Plans (where a clear 110 slope required)

From Standard Planshellip

Guardrail Index 536-001

YES Wrong

Second issuehellipTree violates barrier setback per FDM Table 21542

Guardrail Index 536-001

YES Wrong

Second issuehellipTree violates barrier setback per FDM Table 21542

From FDMhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Any issue hereYES Wrong

First issuehellipPerpendicular guardrail is not proven crashworthybull No end treatmentsbull Violates ldquotaper raterdquo

requirements of SPI Part I (big time)

bull Requires shielding if within Clear Zone

Answerhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Any issue hereYES Wrong

Second issuehellipPerpendicular guardrail within the Approach Terminalrsquos clear area in the Standard Plans (where a clear 110 slope required)

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Any issue hereYES Wrong

Third issuehellipPerpendicular guardrail violates barrier setback per FDM Table 21542

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Solution 1

REMOVE theperpendicularGuardrail

Orhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Solution 2

1 Extend Guardrail to meet Length of Need per SPI Part B (Excel lsquoDesign Toolrsquo) which is Roadside Design Guide Eq 5-3

2 Meet minimum barrier setback per FDM Table 21542 (5 feet for general guardrail)

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Final Case StudyAssumptionsbull Design Speed

50 mph

bull Piers designed to withstand 600 kip impact load per FDM215454(Pier Protection Barrier notRequired)

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereAnswerhellip YES

First issuehellipPiers NOT shielded

ldquoLength of Needrdquo NOT met per SPI Part B (Excel Design Tool)

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereAnswerhellip YES

First issuehellipPiers NOT shielded

ldquoLength of Needrdquo NOT met per SPI Part B (Excel Design Tool)

Piers are behind the ldquogatingrdquo(break-away) portion of Approach Terminal

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereYES

Second issuehellipFlared Terminal usage on hold per RDB18-02

Regardlesshellip ldquoTaper Raterdquo too steep here at Approach Terminal (about 13 shown)

Guardrail requires 115 Max Taper Rate per SPI Part I

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereAnswerhellip YES

Third issuehellipldquoBarrier Setbackrdquo requirement likely not satisfied

per FDM Table 21542(5 feet or greater)hellip

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereYES

Fourth issuehellipldquoTrailing Anchoragerdquo not properly extended downstream of hazard

25-foot Requirement SPI C1 amp lsquoLONrsquo Design Tool (Excel)hellip

Answerhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereYES

Fourth issuehellipldquoTrailing Anchoragerdquo not properly extended downstream of hazard

25-foot Requirement SPI C1 amp lsquoLONrsquo Design Tool (Excel)hellip

AnswerhellipFrom lsquoLength of Needrsquo Excel Sheethellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Crash Cushion Index 544-001

Approach Terminals Solution 1lsquoCrash Cushionrsquobull ldquoSystem Widthrdquo ndash

lsquoWidersquo per SPI 544-001 Part C

bull ldquoLength Restrictionrdquo - per SPI 544-001 Part F

bull Contact Central Office for guidance

Note Define Crash Cushion with provided CADD cellhellipldquoSummary of Permanent Crash Cushions Tablerdquo

Guardrail Index 536-001 Crash Cushion Index 544-001

Approach Terminals Solution 1lsquoCrash Cushionrsquobull Guardrail ldquoreduced

post spacingrdquo to reduce required hazard setback per FDM Table 21542

bull Again contact Central Office for guidance for such limited space

Concrete Barrier Index 521-001 Crash Cushion 544-001

Approach Terminals Solution 2lsquoConcrete Barrierrsquo amp lsquoCrash Cushionrsquo

bull Requires project-specific design

bull Contact Central Office for guidance for such limited space

Questions

Richard Stepp PEStandard Plans Engineer

Central Office Roadway Design(850) 414-4313

richardsteppdotstateflus

Standard Plans Single-Slope Barriers

Page 8: Roadside Barriers - MASH Implementation Update & Design ... · Roadside Barriers - Lessons Learned 1. GUARDRAIL Standard Plans, Index 536-001 2. CONCRETE BARRIER Standard Plans, Index

Grading lsquoStandard Postrsquo Requirements

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheet 6

bull Front slope must be 12 or flatter

bull Slope break must be 2 feet behind postUnless

Grading lsquoDeep Postrsquo Requirements

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheet 6

bull If lsquoDeep Postrsquo is called for slope break may be located at Center Line of post

bull STILL Front slope must be 12 or flatterNote Unique Pay Item 536-7-1

Guardrail Index 536-001

Shoulder Widens Any issue here

Answerhellip YESbull ldquoTaper Raterdquo requirement is violatedbull Per Standard Plans Instructions (SPI) Part I

bull Design Speed le 45 mph requires 110 Maxbull Design Speed gt 45mph requires 115 Max

Single Face to Double Face Any Issue

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheet 9

Answerhellip

YES

bull ldquoTrailing Anchoragerdquo Standard is not used here (not detailed this way)

Index 536-001 does not show this as a Trailing Anchorage scenario and the details are not compatible or required

Single Face to Double Face Solution

Guardrail Index 536-001

Call for a Standard ldquoFlared End Unitrdquo (included with General Guardrail Pay Item) More guidance provided in next yearrsquos eBook

bull No ldquoTrailing Anchoragerdquo

bull Just call out Begin and End of guardrail types (on face closest to traveled way)

CRT System (Radial) Any issue here

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 11 amp 12

AnswerhellipYES

First IssueObstruction is in the ldquoClear Area Limitrdquo per Standard Plans

(Controlled Release Terminal)

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 11 amp 12

CRT System (Radial)AnswerhellipYES

First IssueObstruction is in the ldquoClear Area Limitrdquo per Standard Plans

Photo Credit Bill Fitzgerald PEKLS Engineering LLC

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 11 amp 12

bull ldquoClear Areardquo Required (15rsquox30rsquo)

bull ldquoClear Areardquo is free of obstructions and has 12 Slope Max

CRT System (Radial) From Standard Planshellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 11 amp 12

Requires 25-footlinear End TreatmentPer Standard Plans

(12rsquo-6rdquo Shown)

CRT System (Radial) Any other issue here

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 11 amp 12

bull 25-foot linear End Treatment required

bull If this is not possible due limited space use a lsquovariationrsquo for General Radial Guardrail (Not CRT)(No breakaway posts)

CRT System (Radial) Per Standard Planshellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheet 20

Pipe Rail Callouts Any issue hereAnswerhellip YES

Pipe Rail must terminate outside of End Treatments per SPI Part E and Standard PlansSolution

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 13-15

Rigid Barrier Connections End Shielding

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 13-15

Rigid Barrier Connection Any Issue HereAnswerhellip YES

asymp13 foot overlap with barrier is no longer Standard

(Overlap now only 7frac14rdquo Since FY2017-18 Standards for newsingle-faced guardrail)

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 13-15

Rigid Barrier Connection Any Issues HereYES

asymp13 foot overlap with barrier is no longer Standard

(Overlap now only 7frac14rdquo Since FY2017-18 Standards for newsingle-faced guardrail)

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 13-15

Rigid Barrier Connection Any Issues Here

Solution

YES

asymp13 foot overlap with barrier is no longer Standard

(Overlap now only 7frac14rdquo Since FY2017-18 Standards for newsingle-faced guardrail)

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8 13-14

Answerhellip

YES

Guardrail system ishellip

not long enough

Rigid Barrier Connection Any issue here

Minimum Length is Length of Approach Transition Connection lsquoLArsquoplus Length of End Treatment lsquoLErsquo

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8 13-14

Rigid Barrier End Shielding Min Length TL-2

lsquoLArsquo 213rsquo

+lsquoLErsquo 406rsquo

=

62rsquo

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8 13-14

Rigid Barrier End Shielding Min Length TL-2

lsquoLArsquo 213rsquo

+lsquoLErsquo 406rsquo

=

62rsquo

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8 13-14

Rigid Barrier End Shielding Min Length TL-3

lsquoLArsquo 306rsquo

+lsquoLErsquo 531rsquo

=

84rsquo

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8 13-14

Rigid Barrier End Shielding Min Length TL-3

lsquoLArsquo 306rsquo

+lsquoLErsquo 531rsquo

=

84rsquoNOTE If these lengths are not possible due to limited space consider the use of a Crash Cushion or a project-specific lsquovariationrsquo to fit the best barrier system possible

Contact Central Office for assistance

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Any issues hereAnswerhellip YES

1 Flared terminals not permitted per RDB18-02

2 Curbed conditions require parallel Approach Terminals per Standard Plans ampSPI Part C3 Approach Terminals require lsquoType Ersquo Curb

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals

From Standard Planshellip

Answerhellip YES

1 Flared terminals not permitted per RDB18-02

2 Curbed conditions require parallel Approach Terminals per Standard Plans ampSPI Part C3 Approach Terminals require lsquoType Ersquo Curb

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Solution

1 Flared terminals not permitted per RDB18-02

2 Curbed conditions require parallel Approach Terminals per Standard Plans

3 Approach Terminals require lsquoType Ersquo Curb

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Any issues hereYES Wrong

First issuehellipFront slope break should be 6 feet behind guardrail face at post 1 per the Standards (110 Max)

Second issuehellipMisc Asphalt should extend 10 feet upstream of post 1 per Standards

Answerhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach TerminalsYES Wrong

First issuehellipFront slope break should be 6 feet behind guardrail face at post 1 per the Standards (110 Min)

Second issuehellipMisc Asphalt should extend 10 feet upstream of post 1 per Standards

Answerhellip

From Standard Planshellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach TerminalsYES Wrong

First issuehellipFront slope break should be 6 feet behind guardrail face at post 1 per the Standards (110 Min)

Second issuehellipMisc Asphalt should extend 10 feet upstream of post 1 per Standards

Answerhellip

Example of Poor Slope Break Location (and steep slope not shielded)

Photo Credit Bill Fitzgerald PE

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach TerminalsYES Wrong

First issuehellipFront slope break should be 6 feet behind guardrail face at post 1 per the Standards (110 Min)

Second issuehellipMisc Asphalt should extend 10 feet upstream of post 1 per Standards

Answerhellip

Example of Poor Grading (The reason for Misc Asphalt requirement)

Photo Credit Bill Fitzgerald PE

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals SolutionYES Wrong

First issuehellipFront slope break should be 6 feet behind guardrail face at post 1 per the Standards (110 Min)

Second issuehellipMisc Asphalt should extend 10 feet upstream of post 1 per Standards

Answerhellip

Correctedhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Any issues hereYES Wrong

First issuehellipTrees are within the Approach Terminalrsquos clear area in the Standard Plans (where a clear 110 slope required)

Second issuehellipTree violates barrier setback per FDM Table 21542

Answerhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Any issues hereYES Wrong

First issuehellipTrees are within the Approach Terminalrsquos clear area in the Standard Plans (where a clear 110 slope required)

Second issuehellipTree violates barrier setback per FDM Table 21542

Answerhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach TerminalsYES Wrong

First issuehellipTrees are within the Approach Terminalrsquos clear area in the Standard Plans (where a clear 110 slope required)

From Standard Planshellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals

CREDIT VIRGINIA DOT ndash SKT Crash Test Published October 2016

httpswwwyoutubecomwatchv=OsKlfatcjogampfeature=youtube

httpswwwyoutubecomwatchv=h7tct7Oo9-8ampfeature=youtube

YES Wrong

First issuehellipTrees are within the Approach Terminalrsquos clear area in the Standard Plans (where a clear 110 slope required)

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals

CREDIT VIRGINIA DOT ndash SKT Crash Test Published October 2016

httpswwwyoutubecomwatchv=74ImLTY-PhUampfeature=youtube

YES Wrong

First issuehellipTrees are within the Approach Terminalrsquos clear area in the Standard Plans (where a clear 110 slope required)

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach TerminalsYES Wrong

First issuehellipTrees are within the Approach Terminalrsquos clear area in the Standard Plans (where a clear 110 slope required)

From Standard Planshellip

Guardrail Index 536-001

YES Wrong

Second issuehellipTree violates barrier setback per FDM Table 21542

Guardrail Index 536-001

YES Wrong

Second issuehellipTree violates barrier setback per FDM Table 21542

From FDMhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Any issue hereYES Wrong

First issuehellipPerpendicular guardrail is not proven crashworthybull No end treatmentsbull Violates ldquotaper raterdquo

requirements of SPI Part I (big time)

bull Requires shielding if within Clear Zone

Answerhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Any issue hereYES Wrong

Second issuehellipPerpendicular guardrail within the Approach Terminalrsquos clear area in the Standard Plans (where a clear 110 slope required)

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Any issue hereYES Wrong

Third issuehellipPerpendicular guardrail violates barrier setback per FDM Table 21542

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Solution 1

REMOVE theperpendicularGuardrail

Orhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Solution 2

1 Extend Guardrail to meet Length of Need per SPI Part B (Excel lsquoDesign Toolrsquo) which is Roadside Design Guide Eq 5-3

2 Meet minimum barrier setback per FDM Table 21542 (5 feet for general guardrail)

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Final Case StudyAssumptionsbull Design Speed

50 mph

bull Piers designed to withstand 600 kip impact load per FDM215454(Pier Protection Barrier notRequired)

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereAnswerhellip YES

First issuehellipPiers NOT shielded

ldquoLength of Needrdquo NOT met per SPI Part B (Excel Design Tool)

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereAnswerhellip YES

First issuehellipPiers NOT shielded

ldquoLength of Needrdquo NOT met per SPI Part B (Excel Design Tool)

Piers are behind the ldquogatingrdquo(break-away) portion of Approach Terminal

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereYES

Second issuehellipFlared Terminal usage on hold per RDB18-02

Regardlesshellip ldquoTaper Raterdquo too steep here at Approach Terminal (about 13 shown)

Guardrail requires 115 Max Taper Rate per SPI Part I

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereAnswerhellip YES

Third issuehellipldquoBarrier Setbackrdquo requirement likely not satisfied

per FDM Table 21542(5 feet or greater)hellip

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereYES

Fourth issuehellipldquoTrailing Anchoragerdquo not properly extended downstream of hazard

25-foot Requirement SPI C1 amp lsquoLONrsquo Design Tool (Excel)hellip

Answerhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereYES

Fourth issuehellipldquoTrailing Anchoragerdquo not properly extended downstream of hazard

25-foot Requirement SPI C1 amp lsquoLONrsquo Design Tool (Excel)hellip

AnswerhellipFrom lsquoLength of Needrsquo Excel Sheethellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Crash Cushion Index 544-001

Approach Terminals Solution 1lsquoCrash Cushionrsquobull ldquoSystem Widthrdquo ndash

lsquoWidersquo per SPI 544-001 Part C

bull ldquoLength Restrictionrdquo - per SPI 544-001 Part F

bull Contact Central Office for guidance

Note Define Crash Cushion with provided CADD cellhellipldquoSummary of Permanent Crash Cushions Tablerdquo

Guardrail Index 536-001 Crash Cushion Index 544-001

Approach Terminals Solution 1lsquoCrash Cushionrsquobull Guardrail ldquoreduced

post spacingrdquo to reduce required hazard setback per FDM Table 21542

bull Again contact Central Office for guidance for such limited space

Concrete Barrier Index 521-001 Crash Cushion 544-001

Approach Terminals Solution 2lsquoConcrete Barrierrsquo amp lsquoCrash Cushionrsquo

bull Requires project-specific design

bull Contact Central Office for guidance for such limited space

Questions

Richard Stepp PEStandard Plans Engineer

Central Office Roadway Design(850) 414-4313

richardsteppdotstateflus

Standard Plans Single-Slope Barriers

Page 9: Roadside Barriers - MASH Implementation Update & Design ... · Roadside Barriers - Lessons Learned 1. GUARDRAIL Standard Plans, Index 536-001 2. CONCRETE BARRIER Standard Plans, Index

Grading lsquoDeep Postrsquo Requirements

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheet 6

bull If lsquoDeep Postrsquo is called for slope break may be located at Center Line of post

bull STILL Front slope must be 12 or flatterNote Unique Pay Item 536-7-1

Guardrail Index 536-001

Shoulder Widens Any issue here

Answerhellip YESbull ldquoTaper Raterdquo requirement is violatedbull Per Standard Plans Instructions (SPI) Part I

bull Design Speed le 45 mph requires 110 Maxbull Design Speed gt 45mph requires 115 Max

Single Face to Double Face Any Issue

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheet 9

Answerhellip

YES

bull ldquoTrailing Anchoragerdquo Standard is not used here (not detailed this way)

Index 536-001 does not show this as a Trailing Anchorage scenario and the details are not compatible or required

Single Face to Double Face Solution

Guardrail Index 536-001

Call for a Standard ldquoFlared End Unitrdquo (included with General Guardrail Pay Item) More guidance provided in next yearrsquos eBook

bull No ldquoTrailing Anchoragerdquo

bull Just call out Begin and End of guardrail types (on face closest to traveled way)

CRT System (Radial) Any issue here

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 11 amp 12

AnswerhellipYES

First IssueObstruction is in the ldquoClear Area Limitrdquo per Standard Plans

(Controlled Release Terminal)

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 11 amp 12

CRT System (Radial)AnswerhellipYES

First IssueObstruction is in the ldquoClear Area Limitrdquo per Standard Plans

Photo Credit Bill Fitzgerald PEKLS Engineering LLC

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 11 amp 12

bull ldquoClear Areardquo Required (15rsquox30rsquo)

bull ldquoClear Areardquo is free of obstructions and has 12 Slope Max

CRT System (Radial) From Standard Planshellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 11 amp 12

Requires 25-footlinear End TreatmentPer Standard Plans

(12rsquo-6rdquo Shown)

CRT System (Radial) Any other issue here

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 11 amp 12

bull 25-foot linear End Treatment required

bull If this is not possible due limited space use a lsquovariationrsquo for General Radial Guardrail (Not CRT)(No breakaway posts)

CRT System (Radial) Per Standard Planshellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheet 20

Pipe Rail Callouts Any issue hereAnswerhellip YES

Pipe Rail must terminate outside of End Treatments per SPI Part E and Standard PlansSolution

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 13-15

Rigid Barrier Connections End Shielding

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 13-15

Rigid Barrier Connection Any Issue HereAnswerhellip YES

asymp13 foot overlap with barrier is no longer Standard

(Overlap now only 7frac14rdquo Since FY2017-18 Standards for newsingle-faced guardrail)

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 13-15

Rigid Barrier Connection Any Issues HereYES

asymp13 foot overlap with barrier is no longer Standard

(Overlap now only 7frac14rdquo Since FY2017-18 Standards for newsingle-faced guardrail)

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 13-15

Rigid Barrier Connection Any Issues Here

Solution

YES

asymp13 foot overlap with barrier is no longer Standard

(Overlap now only 7frac14rdquo Since FY2017-18 Standards for newsingle-faced guardrail)

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8 13-14

Answerhellip

YES

Guardrail system ishellip

not long enough

Rigid Barrier Connection Any issue here

Minimum Length is Length of Approach Transition Connection lsquoLArsquoplus Length of End Treatment lsquoLErsquo

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8 13-14

Rigid Barrier End Shielding Min Length TL-2

lsquoLArsquo 213rsquo

+lsquoLErsquo 406rsquo

=

62rsquo

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8 13-14

Rigid Barrier End Shielding Min Length TL-2

lsquoLArsquo 213rsquo

+lsquoLErsquo 406rsquo

=

62rsquo

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8 13-14

Rigid Barrier End Shielding Min Length TL-3

lsquoLArsquo 306rsquo

+lsquoLErsquo 531rsquo

=

84rsquo

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8 13-14

Rigid Barrier End Shielding Min Length TL-3

lsquoLArsquo 306rsquo

+lsquoLErsquo 531rsquo

=

84rsquoNOTE If these lengths are not possible due to limited space consider the use of a Crash Cushion or a project-specific lsquovariationrsquo to fit the best barrier system possible

Contact Central Office for assistance

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Any issues hereAnswerhellip YES

1 Flared terminals not permitted per RDB18-02

2 Curbed conditions require parallel Approach Terminals per Standard Plans ampSPI Part C3 Approach Terminals require lsquoType Ersquo Curb

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals

From Standard Planshellip

Answerhellip YES

1 Flared terminals not permitted per RDB18-02

2 Curbed conditions require parallel Approach Terminals per Standard Plans ampSPI Part C3 Approach Terminals require lsquoType Ersquo Curb

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Solution

1 Flared terminals not permitted per RDB18-02

2 Curbed conditions require parallel Approach Terminals per Standard Plans

3 Approach Terminals require lsquoType Ersquo Curb

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Any issues hereYES Wrong

First issuehellipFront slope break should be 6 feet behind guardrail face at post 1 per the Standards (110 Max)

Second issuehellipMisc Asphalt should extend 10 feet upstream of post 1 per Standards

Answerhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach TerminalsYES Wrong

First issuehellipFront slope break should be 6 feet behind guardrail face at post 1 per the Standards (110 Min)

Second issuehellipMisc Asphalt should extend 10 feet upstream of post 1 per Standards

Answerhellip

From Standard Planshellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach TerminalsYES Wrong

First issuehellipFront slope break should be 6 feet behind guardrail face at post 1 per the Standards (110 Min)

Second issuehellipMisc Asphalt should extend 10 feet upstream of post 1 per Standards

Answerhellip

Example of Poor Slope Break Location (and steep slope not shielded)

Photo Credit Bill Fitzgerald PE

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach TerminalsYES Wrong

First issuehellipFront slope break should be 6 feet behind guardrail face at post 1 per the Standards (110 Min)

Second issuehellipMisc Asphalt should extend 10 feet upstream of post 1 per Standards

Answerhellip

Example of Poor Grading (The reason for Misc Asphalt requirement)

Photo Credit Bill Fitzgerald PE

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals SolutionYES Wrong

First issuehellipFront slope break should be 6 feet behind guardrail face at post 1 per the Standards (110 Min)

Second issuehellipMisc Asphalt should extend 10 feet upstream of post 1 per Standards

Answerhellip

Correctedhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Any issues hereYES Wrong

First issuehellipTrees are within the Approach Terminalrsquos clear area in the Standard Plans (where a clear 110 slope required)

Second issuehellipTree violates barrier setback per FDM Table 21542

Answerhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Any issues hereYES Wrong

First issuehellipTrees are within the Approach Terminalrsquos clear area in the Standard Plans (where a clear 110 slope required)

Second issuehellipTree violates barrier setback per FDM Table 21542

Answerhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach TerminalsYES Wrong

First issuehellipTrees are within the Approach Terminalrsquos clear area in the Standard Plans (where a clear 110 slope required)

From Standard Planshellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals

CREDIT VIRGINIA DOT ndash SKT Crash Test Published October 2016

httpswwwyoutubecomwatchv=OsKlfatcjogampfeature=youtube

httpswwwyoutubecomwatchv=h7tct7Oo9-8ampfeature=youtube

YES Wrong

First issuehellipTrees are within the Approach Terminalrsquos clear area in the Standard Plans (where a clear 110 slope required)

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals

CREDIT VIRGINIA DOT ndash SKT Crash Test Published October 2016

httpswwwyoutubecomwatchv=74ImLTY-PhUampfeature=youtube

YES Wrong

First issuehellipTrees are within the Approach Terminalrsquos clear area in the Standard Plans (where a clear 110 slope required)

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach TerminalsYES Wrong

First issuehellipTrees are within the Approach Terminalrsquos clear area in the Standard Plans (where a clear 110 slope required)

From Standard Planshellip

Guardrail Index 536-001

YES Wrong

Second issuehellipTree violates barrier setback per FDM Table 21542

Guardrail Index 536-001

YES Wrong

Second issuehellipTree violates barrier setback per FDM Table 21542

From FDMhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Any issue hereYES Wrong

First issuehellipPerpendicular guardrail is not proven crashworthybull No end treatmentsbull Violates ldquotaper raterdquo

requirements of SPI Part I (big time)

bull Requires shielding if within Clear Zone

Answerhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Any issue hereYES Wrong

Second issuehellipPerpendicular guardrail within the Approach Terminalrsquos clear area in the Standard Plans (where a clear 110 slope required)

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Any issue hereYES Wrong

Third issuehellipPerpendicular guardrail violates barrier setback per FDM Table 21542

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Solution 1

REMOVE theperpendicularGuardrail

Orhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Solution 2

1 Extend Guardrail to meet Length of Need per SPI Part B (Excel lsquoDesign Toolrsquo) which is Roadside Design Guide Eq 5-3

2 Meet minimum barrier setback per FDM Table 21542 (5 feet for general guardrail)

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Final Case StudyAssumptionsbull Design Speed

50 mph

bull Piers designed to withstand 600 kip impact load per FDM215454(Pier Protection Barrier notRequired)

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereAnswerhellip YES

First issuehellipPiers NOT shielded

ldquoLength of Needrdquo NOT met per SPI Part B (Excel Design Tool)

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereAnswerhellip YES

First issuehellipPiers NOT shielded

ldquoLength of Needrdquo NOT met per SPI Part B (Excel Design Tool)

Piers are behind the ldquogatingrdquo(break-away) portion of Approach Terminal

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereYES

Second issuehellipFlared Terminal usage on hold per RDB18-02

Regardlesshellip ldquoTaper Raterdquo too steep here at Approach Terminal (about 13 shown)

Guardrail requires 115 Max Taper Rate per SPI Part I

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereAnswerhellip YES

Third issuehellipldquoBarrier Setbackrdquo requirement likely not satisfied

per FDM Table 21542(5 feet or greater)hellip

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereYES

Fourth issuehellipldquoTrailing Anchoragerdquo not properly extended downstream of hazard

25-foot Requirement SPI C1 amp lsquoLONrsquo Design Tool (Excel)hellip

Answerhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereYES

Fourth issuehellipldquoTrailing Anchoragerdquo not properly extended downstream of hazard

25-foot Requirement SPI C1 amp lsquoLONrsquo Design Tool (Excel)hellip

AnswerhellipFrom lsquoLength of Needrsquo Excel Sheethellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Crash Cushion Index 544-001

Approach Terminals Solution 1lsquoCrash Cushionrsquobull ldquoSystem Widthrdquo ndash

lsquoWidersquo per SPI 544-001 Part C

bull ldquoLength Restrictionrdquo - per SPI 544-001 Part F

bull Contact Central Office for guidance

Note Define Crash Cushion with provided CADD cellhellipldquoSummary of Permanent Crash Cushions Tablerdquo

Guardrail Index 536-001 Crash Cushion Index 544-001

Approach Terminals Solution 1lsquoCrash Cushionrsquobull Guardrail ldquoreduced

post spacingrdquo to reduce required hazard setback per FDM Table 21542

bull Again contact Central Office for guidance for such limited space

Concrete Barrier Index 521-001 Crash Cushion 544-001

Approach Terminals Solution 2lsquoConcrete Barrierrsquo amp lsquoCrash Cushionrsquo

bull Requires project-specific design

bull Contact Central Office for guidance for such limited space

Questions

Richard Stepp PEStandard Plans Engineer

Central Office Roadway Design(850) 414-4313

richardsteppdotstateflus

Standard Plans Single-Slope Barriers

Page 10: Roadside Barriers - MASH Implementation Update & Design ... · Roadside Barriers - Lessons Learned 1. GUARDRAIL Standard Plans, Index 536-001 2. CONCRETE BARRIER Standard Plans, Index

Guardrail Index 536-001

Shoulder Widens Any issue here

Answerhellip YESbull ldquoTaper Raterdquo requirement is violatedbull Per Standard Plans Instructions (SPI) Part I

bull Design Speed le 45 mph requires 110 Maxbull Design Speed gt 45mph requires 115 Max

Single Face to Double Face Any Issue

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheet 9

Answerhellip

YES

bull ldquoTrailing Anchoragerdquo Standard is not used here (not detailed this way)

Index 536-001 does not show this as a Trailing Anchorage scenario and the details are not compatible or required

Single Face to Double Face Solution

Guardrail Index 536-001

Call for a Standard ldquoFlared End Unitrdquo (included with General Guardrail Pay Item) More guidance provided in next yearrsquos eBook

bull No ldquoTrailing Anchoragerdquo

bull Just call out Begin and End of guardrail types (on face closest to traveled way)

CRT System (Radial) Any issue here

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 11 amp 12

AnswerhellipYES

First IssueObstruction is in the ldquoClear Area Limitrdquo per Standard Plans

(Controlled Release Terminal)

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 11 amp 12

CRT System (Radial)AnswerhellipYES

First IssueObstruction is in the ldquoClear Area Limitrdquo per Standard Plans

Photo Credit Bill Fitzgerald PEKLS Engineering LLC

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 11 amp 12

bull ldquoClear Areardquo Required (15rsquox30rsquo)

bull ldquoClear Areardquo is free of obstructions and has 12 Slope Max

CRT System (Radial) From Standard Planshellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 11 amp 12

Requires 25-footlinear End TreatmentPer Standard Plans

(12rsquo-6rdquo Shown)

CRT System (Radial) Any other issue here

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 11 amp 12

bull 25-foot linear End Treatment required

bull If this is not possible due limited space use a lsquovariationrsquo for General Radial Guardrail (Not CRT)(No breakaway posts)

CRT System (Radial) Per Standard Planshellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheet 20

Pipe Rail Callouts Any issue hereAnswerhellip YES

Pipe Rail must terminate outside of End Treatments per SPI Part E and Standard PlansSolution

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 13-15

Rigid Barrier Connections End Shielding

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 13-15

Rigid Barrier Connection Any Issue HereAnswerhellip YES

asymp13 foot overlap with barrier is no longer Standard

(Overlap now only 7frac14rdquo Since FY2017-18 Standards for newsingle-faced guardrail)

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 13-15

Rigid Barrier Connection Any Issues HereYES

asymp13 foot overlap with barrier is no longer Standard

(Overlap now only 7frac14rdquo Since FY2017-18 Standards for newsingle-faced guardrail)

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 13-15

Rigid Barrier Connection Any Issues Here

Solution

YES

asymp13 foot overlap with barrier is no longer Standard

(Overlap now only 7frac14rdquo Since FY2017-18 Standards for newsingle-faced guardrail)

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8 13-14

Answerhellip

YES

Guardrail system ishellip

not long enough

Rigid Barrier Connection Any issue here

Minimum Length is Length of Approach Transition Connection lsquoLArsquoplus Length of End Treatment lsquoLErsquo

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8 13-14

Rigid Barrier End Shielding Min Length TL-2

lsquoLArsquo 213rsquo

+lsquoLErsquo 406rsquo

=

62rsquo

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8 13-14

Rigid Barrier End Shielding Min Length TL-2

lsquoLArsquo 213rsquo

+lsquoLErsquo 406rsquo

=

62rsquo

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8 13-14

Rigid Barrier End Shielding Min Length TL-3

lsquoLArsquo 306rsquo

+lsquoLErsquo 531rsquo

=

84rsquo

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8 13-14

Rigid Barrier End Shielding Min Length TL-3

lsquoLArsquo 306rsquo

+lsquoLErsquo 531rsquo

=

84rsquoNOTE If these lengths are not possible due to limited space consider the use of a Crash Cushion or a project-specific lsquovariationrsquo to fit the best barrier system possible

Contact Central Office for assistance

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Any issues hereAnswerhellip YES

1 Flared terminals not permitted per RDB18-02

2 Curbed conditions require parallel Approach Terminals per Standard Plans ampSPI Part C3 Approach Terminals require lsquoType Ersquo Curb

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals

From Standard Planshellip

Answerhellip YES

1 Flared terminals not permitted per RDB18-02

2 Curbed conditions require parallel Approach Terminals per Standard Plans ampSPI Part C3 Approach Terminals require lsquoType Ersquo Curb

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Solution

1 Flared terminals not permitted per RDB18-02

2 Curbed conditions require parallel Approach Terminals per Standard Plans

3 Approach Terminals require lsquoType Ersquo Curb

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Any issues hereYES Wrong

First issuehellipFront slope break should be 6 feet behind guardrail face at post 1 per the Standards (110 Max)

Second issuehellipMisc Asphalt should extend 10 feet upstream of post 1 per Standards

Answerhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach TerminalsYES Wrong

First issuehellipFront slope break should be 6 feet behind guardrail face at post 1 per the Standards (110 Min)

Second issuehellipMisc Asphalt should extend 10 feet upstream of post 1 per Standards

Answerhellip

From Standard Planshellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach TerminalsYES Wrong

First issuehellipFront slope break should be 6 feet behind guardrail face at post 1 per the Standards (110 Min)

Second issuehellipMisc Asphalt should extend 10 feet upstream of post 1 per Standards

Answerhellip

Example of Poor Slope Break Location (and steep slope not shielded)

Photo Credit Bill Fitzgerald PE

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach TerminalsYES Wrong

First issuehellipFront slope break should be 6 feet behind guardrail face at post 1 per the Standards (110 Min)

Second issuehellipMisc Asphalt should extend 10 feet upstream of post 1 per Standards

Answerhellip

Example of Poor Grading (The reason for Misc Asphalt requirement)

Photo Credit Bill Fitzgerald PE

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals SolutionYES Wrong

First issuehellipFront slope break should be 6 feet behind guardrail face at post 1 per the Standards (110 Min)

Second issuehellipMisc Asphalt should extend 10 feet upstream of post 1 per Standards

Answerhellip

Correctedhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Any issues hereYES Wrong

First issuehellipTrees are within the Approach Terminalrsquos clear area in the Standard Plans (where a clear 110 slope required)

Second issuehellipTree violates barrier setback per FDM Table 21542

Answerhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Any issues hereYES Wrong

First issuehellipTrees are within the Approach Terminalrsquos clear area in the Standard Plans (where a clear 110 slope required)

Second issuehellipTree violates barrier setback per FDM Table 21542

Answerhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach TerminalsYES Wrong

First issuehellipTrees are within the Approach Terminalrsquos clear area in the Standard Plans (where a clear 110 slope required)

From Standard Planshellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals

CREDIT VIRGINIA DOT ndash SKT Crash Test Published October 2016

httpswwwyoutubecomwatchv=OsKlfatcjogampfeature=youtube

httpswwwyoutubecomwatchv=h7tct7Oo9-8ampfeature=youtube

YES Wrong

First issuehellipTrees are within the Approach Terminalrsquos clear area in the Standard Plans (where a clear 110 slope required)

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals

CREDIT VIRGINIA DOT ndash SKT Crash Test Published October 2016

httpswwwyoutubecomwatchv=74ImLTY-PhUampfeature=youtube

YES Wrong

First issuehellipTrees are within the Approach Terminalrsquos clear area in the Standard Plans (where a clear 110 slope required)

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach TerminalsYES Wrong

First issuehellipTrees are within the Approach Terminalrsquos clear area in the Standard Plans (where a clear 110 slope required)

From Standard Planshellip

Guardrail Index 536-001

YES Wrong

Second issuehellipTree violates barrier setback per FDM Table 21542

Guardrail Index 536-001

YES Wrong

Second issuehellipTree violates barrier setback per FDM Table 21542

From FDMhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Any issue hereYES Wrong

First issuehellipPerpendicular guardrail is not proven crashworthybull No end treatmentsbull Violates ldquotaper raterdquo

requirements of SPI Part I (big time)

bull Requires shielding if within Clear Zone

Answerhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Any issue hereYES Wrong

Second issuehellipPerpendicular guardrail within the Approach Terminalrsquos clear area in the Standard Plans (where a clear 110 slope required)

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Any issue hereYES Wrong

Third issuehellipPerpendicular guardrail violates barrier setback per FDM Table 21542

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Solution 1

REMOVE theperpendicularGuardrail

Orhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Solution 2

1 Extend Guardrail to meet Length of Need per SPI Part B (Excel lsquoDesign Toolrsquo) which is Roadside Design Guide Eq 5-3

2 Meet minimum barrier setback per FDM Table 21542 (5 feet for general guardrail)

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Final Case StudyAssumptionsbull Design Speed

50 mph

bull Piers designed to withstand 600 kip impact load per FDM215454(Pier Protection Barrier notRequired)

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereAnswerhellip YES

First issuehellipPiers NOT shielded

ldquoLength of Needrdquo NOT met per SPI Part B (Excel Design Tool)

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereAnswerhellip YES

First issuehellipPiers NOT shielded

ldquoLength of Needrdquo NOT met per SPI Part B (Excel Design Tool)

Piers are behind the ldquogatingrdquo(break-away) portion of Approach Terminal

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereYES

Second issuehellipFlared Terminal usage on hold per RDB18-02

Regardlesshellip ldquoTaper Raterdquo too steep here at Approach Terminal (about 13 shown)

Guardrail requires 115 Max Taper Rate per SPI Part I

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereAnswerhellip YES

Third issuehellipldquoBarrier Setbackrdquo requirement likely not satisfied

per FDM Table 21542(5 feet or greater)hellip

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereYES

Fourth issuehellipldquoTrailing Anchoragerdquo not properly extended downstream of hazard

25-foot Requirement SPI C1 amp lsquoLONrsquo Design Tool (Excel)hellip

Answerhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereYES

Fourth issuehellipldquoTrailing Anchoragerdquo not properly extended downstream of hazard

25-foot Requirement SPI C1 amp lsquoLONrsquo Design Tool (Excel)hellip

AnswerhellipFrom lsquoLength of Needrsquo Excel Sheethellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Crash Cushion Index 544-001

Approach Terminals Solution 1lsquoCrash Cushionrsquobull ldquoSystem Widthrdquo ndash

lsquoWidersquo per SPI 544-001 Part C

bull ldquoLength Restrictionrdquo - per SPI 544-001 Part F

bull Contact Central Office for guidance

Note Define Crash Cushion with provided CADD cellhellipldquoSummary of Permanent Crash Cushions Tablerdquo

Guardrail Index 536-001 Crash Cushion Index 544-001

Approach Terminals Solution 1lsquoCrash Cushionrsquobull Guardrail ldquoreduced

post spacingrdquo to reduce required hazard setback per FDM Table 21542

bull Again contact Central Office for guidance for such limited space

Concrete Barrier Index 521-001 Crash Cushion 544-001

Approach Terminals Solution 2lsquoConcrete Barrierrsquo amp lsquoCrash Cushionrsquo

bull Requires project-specific design

bull Contact Central Office for guidance for such limited space

Questions

Richard Stepp PEStandard Plans Engineer

Central Office Roadway Design(850) 414-4313

richardsteppdotstateflus

Standard Plans Single-Slope Barriers

Page 11: Roadside Barriers - MASH Implementation Update & Design ... · Roadside Barriers - Lessons Learned 1. GUARDRAIL Standard Plans, Index 536-001 2. CONCRETE BARRIER Standard Plans, Index

Single Face to Double Face Any Issue

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheet 9

Answerhellip

YES

bull ldquoTrailing Anchoragerdquo Standard is not used here (not detailed this way)

Index 536-001 does not show this as a Trailing Anchorage scenario and the details are not compatible or required

Single Face to Double Face Solution

Guardrail Index 536-001

Call for a Standard ldquoFlared End Unitrdquo (included with General Guardrail Pay Item) More guidance provided in next yearrsquos eBook

bull No ldquoTrailing Anchoragerdquo

bull Just call out Begin and End of guardrail types (on face closest to traveled way)

CRT System (Radial) Any issue here

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 11 amp 12

AnswerhellipYES

First IssueObstruction is in the ldquoClear Area Limitrdquo per Standard Plans

(Controlled Release Terminal)

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 11 amp 12

CRT System (Radial)AnswerhellipYES

First IssueObstruction is in the ldquoClear Area Limitrdquo per Standard Plans

Photo Credit Bill Fitzgerald PEKLS Engineering LLC

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 11 amp 12

bull ldquoClear Areardquo Required (15rsquox30rsquo)

bull ldquoClear Areardquo is free of obstructions and has 12 Slope Max

CRT System (Radial) From Standard Planshellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 11 amp 12

Requires 25-footlinear End TreatmentPer Standard Plans

(12rsquo-6rdquo Shown)

CRT System (Radial) Any other issue here

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 11 amp 12

bull 25-foot linear End Treatment required

bull If this is not possible due limited space use a lsquovariationrsquo for General Radial Guardrail (Not CRT)(No breakaway posts)

CRT System (Radial) Per Standard Planshellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheet 20

Pipe Rail Callouts Any issue hereAnswerhellip YES

Pipe Rail must terminate outside of End Treatments per SPI Part E and Standard PlansSolution

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 13-15

Rigid Barrier Connections End Shielding

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 13-15

Rigid Barrier Connection Any Issue HereAnswerhellip YES

asymp13 foot overlap with barrier is no longer Standard

(Overlap now only 7frac14rdquo Since FY2017-18 Standards for newsingle-faced guardrail)

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 13-15

Rigid Barrier Connection Any Issues HereYES

asymp13 foot overlap with barrier is no longer Standard

(Overlap now only 7frac14rdquo Since FY2017-18 Standards for newsingle-faced guardrail)

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 13-15

Rigid Barrier Connection Any Issues Here

Solution

YES

asymp13 foot overlap with barrier is no longer Standard

(Overlap now only 7frac14rdquo Since FY2017-18 Standards for newsingle-faced guardrail)

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8 13-14

Answerhellip

YES

Guardrail system ishellip

not long enough

Rigid Barrier Connection Any issue here

Minimum Length is Length of Approach Transition Connection lsquoLArsquoplus Length of End Treatment lsquoLErsquo

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8 13-14

Rigid Barrier End Shielding Min Length TL-2

lsquoLArsquo 213rsquo

+lsquoLErsquo 406rsquo

=

62rsquo

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8 13-14

Rigid Barrier End Shielding Min Length TL-2

lsquoLArsquo 213rsquo

+lsquoLErsquo 406rsquo

=

62rsquo

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8 13-14

Rigid Barrier End Shielding Min Length TL-3

lsquoLArsquo 306rsquo

+lsquoLErsquo 531rsquo

=

84rsquo

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8 13-14

Rigid Barrier End Shielding Min Length TL-3

lsquoLArsquo 306rsquo

+lsquoLErsquo 531rsquo

=

84rsquoNOTE If these lengths are not possible due to limited space consider the use of a Crash Cushion or a project-specific lsquovariationrsquo to fit the best barrier system possible

Contact Central Office for assistance

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Any issues hereAnswerhellip YES

1 Flared terminals not permitted per RDB18-02

2 Curbed conditions require parallel Approach Terminals per Standard Plans ampSPI Part C3 Approach Terminals require lsquoType Ersquo Curb

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals

From Standard Planshellip

Answerhellip YES

1 Flared terminals not permitted per RDB18-02

2 Curbed conditions require parallel Approach Terminals per Standard Plans ampSPI Part C3 Approach Terminals require lsquoType Ersquo Curb

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Solution

1 Flared terminals not permitted per RDB18-02

2 Curbed conditions require parallel Approach Terminals per Standard Plans

3 Approach Terminals require lsquoType Ersquo Curb

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Any issues hereYES Wrong

First issuehellipFront slope break should be 6 feet behind guardrail face at post 1 per the Standards (110 Max)

Second issuehellipMisc Asphalt should extend 10 feet upstream of post 1 per Standards

Answerhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach TerminalsYES Wrong

First issuehellipFront slope break should be 6 feet behind guardrail face at post 1 per the Standards (110 Min)

Second issuehellipMisc Asphalt should extend 10 feet upstream of post 1 per Standards

Answerhellip

From Standard Planshellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach TerminalsYES Wrong

First issuehellipFront slope break should be 6 feet behind guardrail face at post 1 per the Standards (110 Min)

Second issuehellipMisc Asphalt should extend 10 feet upstream of post 1 per Standards

Answerhellip

Example of Poor Slope Break Location (and steep slope not shielded)

Photo Credit Bill Fitzgerald PE

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach TerminalsYES Wrong

First issuehellipFront slope break should be 6 feet behind guardrail face at post 1 per the Standards (110 Min)

Second issuehellipMisc Asphalt should extend 10 feet upstream of post 1 per Standards

Answerhellip

Example of Poor Grading (The reason for Misc Asphalt requirement)

Photo Credit Bill Fitzgerald PE

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals SolutionYES Wrong

First issuehellipFront slope break should be 6 feet behind guardrail face at post 1 per the Standards (110 Min)

Second issuehellipMisc Asphalt should extend 10 feet upstream of post 1 per Standards

Answerhellip

Correctedhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Any issues hereYES Wrong

First issuehellipTrees are within the Approach Terminalrsquos clear area in the Standard Plans (where a clear 110 slope required)

Second issuehellipTree violates barrier setback per FDM Table 21542

Answerhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Any issues hereYES Wrong

First issuehellipTrees are within the Approach Terminalrsquos clear area in the Standard Plans (where a clear 110 slope required)

Second issuehellipTree violates barrier setback per FDM Table 21542

Answerhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach TerminalsYES Wrong

First issuehellipTrees are within the Approach Terminalrsquos clear area in the Standard Plans (where a clear 110 slope required)

From Standard Planshellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals

CREDIT VIRGINIA DOT ndash SKT Crash Test Published October 2016

httpswwwyoutubecomwatchv=OsKlfatcjogampfeature=youtube

httpswwwyoutubecomwatchv=h7tct7Oo9-8ampfeature=youtube

YES Wrong

First issuehellipTrees are within the Approach Terminalrsquos clear area in the Standard Plans (where a clear 110 slope required)

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals

CREDIT VIRGINIA DOT ndash SKT Crash Test Published October 2016

httpswwwyoutubecomwatchv=74ImLTY-PhUampfeature=youtube

YES Wrong

First issuehellipTrees are within the Approach Terminalrsquos clear area in the Standard Plans (where a clear 110 slope required)

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach TerminalsYES Wrong

First issuehellipTrees are within the Approach Terminalrsquos clear area in the Standard Plans (where a clear 110 slope required)

From Standard Planshellip

Guardrail Index 536-001

YES Wrong

Second issuehellipTree violates barrier setback per FDM Table 21542

Guardrail Index 536-001

YES Wrong

Second issuehellipTree violates barrier setback per FDM Table 21542

From FDMhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Any issue hereYES Wrong

First issuehellipPerpendicular guardrail is not proven crashworthybull No end treatmentsbull Violates ldquotaper raterdquo

requirements of SPI Part I (big time)

bull Requires shielding if within Clear Zone

Answerhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Any issue hereYES Wrong

Second issuehellipPerpendicular guardrail within the Approach Terminalrsquos clear area in the Standard Plans (where a clear 110 slope required)

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Any issue hereYES Wrong

Third issuehellipPerpendicular guardrail violates barrier setback per FDM Table 21542

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Solution 1

REMOVE theperpendicularGuardrail

Orhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Solution 2

1 Extend Guardrail to meet Length of Need per SPI Part B (Excel lsquoDesign Toolrsquo) which is Roadside Design Guide Eq 5-3

2 Meet minimum barrier setback per FDM Table 21542 (5 feet for general guardrail)

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Final Case StudyAssumptionsbull Design Speed

50 mph

bull Piers designed to withstand 600 kip impact load per FDM215454(Pier Protection Barrier notRequired)

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereAnswerhellip YES

First issuehellipPiers NOT shielded

ldquoLength of Needrdquo NOT met per SPI Part B (Excel Design Tool)

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereAnswerhellip YES

First issuehellipPiers NOT shielded

ldquoLength of Needrdquo NOT met per SPI Part B (Excel Design Tool)

Piers are behind the ldquogatingrdquo(break-away) portion of Approach Terminal

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereYES

Second issuehellipFlared Terminal usage on hold per RDB18-02

Regardlesshellip ldquoTaper Raterdquo too steep here at Approach Terminal (about 13 shown)

Guardrail requires 115 Max Taper Rate per SPI Part I

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereAnswerhellip YES

Third issuehellipldquoBarrier Setbackrdquo requirement likely not satisfied

per FDM Table 21542(5 feet or greater)hellip

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereYES

Fourth issuehellipldquoTrailing Anchoragerdquo not properly extended downstream of hazard

25-foot Requirement SPI C1 amp lsquoLONrsquo Design Tool (Excel)hellip

Answerhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereYES

Fourth issuehellipldquoTrailing Anchoragerdquo not properly extended downstream of hazard

25-foot Requirement SPI C1 amp lsquoLONrsquo Design Tool (Excel)hellip

AnswerhellipFrom lsquoLength of Needrsquo Excel Sheethellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Crash Cushion Index 544-001

Approach Terminals Solution 1lsquoCrash Cushionrsquobull ldquoSystem Widthrdquo ndash

lsquoWidersquo per SPI 544-001 Part C

bull ldquoLength Restrictionrdquo - per SPI 544-001 Part F

bull Contact Central Office for guidance

Note Define Crash Cushion with provided CADD cellhellipldquoSummary of Permanent Crash Cushions Tablerdquo

Guardrail Index 536-001 Crash Cushion Index 544-001

Approach Terminals Solution 1lsquoCrash Cushionrsquobull Guardrail ldquoreduced

post spacingrdquo to reduce required hazard setback per FDM Table 21542

bull Again contact Central Office for guidance for such limited space

Concrete Barrier Index 521-001 Crash Cushion 544-001

Approach Terminals Solution 2lsquoConcrete Barrierrsquo amp lsquoCrash Cushionrsquo

bull Requires project-specific design

bull Contact Central Office for guidance for such limited space

Questions

Richard Stepp PEStandard Plans Engineer

Central Office Roadway Design(850) 414-4313

richardsteppdotstateflus

Standard Plans Single-Slope Barriers

Page 12: Roadside Barriers - MASH Implementation Update & Design ... · Roadside Barriers - Lessons Learned 1. GUARDRAIL Standard Plans, Index 536-001 2. CONCRETE BARRIER Standard Plans, Index

Single Face to Double Face Solution

Guardrail Index 536-001

Call for a Standard ldquoFlared End Unitrdquo (included with General Guardrail Pay Item) More guidance provided in next yearrsquos eBook

bull No ldquoTrailing Anchoragerdquo

bull Just call out Begin and End of guardrail types (on face closest to traveled way)

CRT System (Radial) Any issue here

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 11 amp 12

AnswerhellipYES

First IssueObstruction is in the ldquoClear Area Limitrdquo per Standard Plans

(Controlled Release Terminal)

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 11 amp 12

CRT System (Radial)AnswerhellipYES

First IssueObstruction is in the ldquoClear Area Limitrdquo per Standard Plans

Photo Credit Bill Fitzgerald PEKLS Engineering LLC

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 11 amp 12

bull ldquoClear Areardquo Required (15rsquox30rsquo)

bull ldquoClear Areardquo is free of obstructions and has 12 Slope Max

CRT System (Radial) From Standard Planshellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 11 amp 12

Requires 25-footlinear End TreatmentPer Standard Plans

(12rsquo-6rdquo Shown)

CRT System (Radial) Any other issue here

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 11 amp 12

bull 25-foot linear End Treatment required

bull If this is not possible due limited space use a lsquovariationrsquo for General Radial Guardrail (Not CRT)(No breakaway posts)

CRT System (Radial) Per Standard Planshellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheet 20

Pipe Rail Callouts Any issue hereAnswerhellip YES

Pipe Rail must terminate outside of End Treatments per SPI Part E and Standard PlansSolution

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 13-15

Rigid Barrier Connections End Shielding

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 13-15

Rigid Barrier Connection Any Issue HereAnswerhellip YES

asymp13 foot overlap with barrier is no longer Standard

(Overlap now only 7frac14rdquo Since FY2017-18 Standards for newsingle-faced guardrail)

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 13-15

Rigid Barrier Connection Any Issues HereYES

asymp13 foot overlap with barrier is no longer Standard

(Overlap now only 7frac14rdquo Since FY2017-18 Standards for newsingle-faced guardrail)

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 13-15

Rigid Barrier Connection Any Issues Here

Solution

YES

asymp13 foot overlap with barrier is no longer Standard

(Overlap now only 7frac14rdquo Since FY2017-18 Standards for newsingle-faced guardrail)

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8 13-14

Answerhellip

YES

Guardrail system ishellip

not long enough

Rigid Barrier Connection Any issue here

Minimum Length is Length of Approach Transition Connection lsquoLArsquoplus Length of End Treatment lsquoLErsquo

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8 13-14

Rigid Barrier End Shielding Min Length TL-2

lsquoLArsquo 213rsquo

+lsquoLErsquo 406rsquo

=

62rsquo

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8 13-14

Rigid Barrier End Shielding Min Length TL-2

lsquoLArsquo 213rsquo

+lsquoLErsquo 406rsquo

=

62rsquo

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8 13-14

Rigid Barrier End Shielding Min Length TL-3

lsquoLArsquo 306rsquo

+lsquoLErsquo 531rsquo

=

84rsquo

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8 13-14

Rigid Barrier End Shielding Min Length TL-3

lsquoLArsquo 306rsquo

+lsquoLErsquo 531rsquo

=

84rsquoNOTE If these lengths are not possible due to limited space consider the use of a Crash Cushion or a project-specific lsquovariationrsquo to fit the best barrier system possible

Contact Central Office for assistance

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Any issues hereAnswerhellip YES

1 Flared terminals not permitted per RDB18-02

2 Curbed conditions require parallel Approach Terminals per Standard Plans ampSPI Part C3 Approach Terminals require lsquoType Ersquo Curb

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals

From Standard Planshellip

Answerhellip YES

1 Flared terminals not permitted per RDB18-02

2 Curbed conditions require parallel Approach Terminals per Standard Plans ampSPI Part C3 Approach Terminals require lsquoType Ersquo Curb

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Solution

1 Flared terminals not permitted per RDB18-02

2 Curbed conditions require parallel Approach Terminals per Standard Plans

3 Approach Terminals require lsquoType Ersquo Curb

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Any issues hereYES Wrong

First issuehellipFront slope break should be 6 feet behind guardrail face at post 1 per the Standards (110 Max)

Second issuehellipMisc Asphalt should extend 10 feet upstream of post 1 per Standards

Answerhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach TerminalsYES Wrong

First issuehellipFront slope break should be 6 feet behind guardrail face at post 1 per the Standards (110 Min)

Second issuehellipMisc Asphalt should extend 10 feet upstream of post 1 per Standards

Answerhellip

From Standard Planshellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach TerminalsYES Wrong

First issuehellipFront slope break should be 6 feet behind guardrail face at post 1 per the Standards (110 Min)

Second issuehellipMisc Asphalt should extend 10 feet upstream of post 1 per Standards

Answerhellip

Example of Poor Slope Break Location (and steep slope not shielded)

Photo Credit Bill Fitzgerald PE

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach TerminalsYES Wrong

First issuehellipFront slope break should be 6 feet behind guardrail face at post 1 per the Standards (110 Min)

Second issuehellipMisc Asphalt should extend 10 feet upstream of post 1 per Standards

Answerhellip

Example of Poor Grading (The reason for Misc Asphalt requirement)

Photo Credit Bill Fitzgerald PE

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals SolutionYES Wrong

First issuehellipFront slope break should be 6 feet behind guardrail face at post 1 per the Standards (110 Min)

Second issuehellipMisc Asphalt should extend 10 feet upstream of post 1 per Standards

Answerhellip

Correctedhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Any issues hereYES Wrong

First issuehellipTrees are within the Approach Terminalrsquos clear area in the Standard Plans (where a clear 110 slope required)

Second issuehellipTree violates barrier setback per FDM Table 21542

Answerhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Any issues hereYES Wrong

First issuehellipTrees are within the Approach Terminalrsquos clear area in the Standard Plans (where a clear 110 slope required)

Second issuehellipTree violates barrier setback per FDM Table 21542

Answerhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach TerminalsYES Wrong

First issuehellipTrees are within the Approach Terminalrsquos clear area in the Standard Plans (where a clear 110 slope required)

From Standard Planshellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals

CREDIT VIRGINIA DOT ndash SKT Crash Test Published October 2016

httpswwwyoutubecomwatchv=OsKlfatcjogampfeature=youtube

httpswwwyoutubecomwatchv=h7tct7Oo9-8ampfeature=youtube

YES Wrong

First issuehellipTrees are within the Approach Terminalrsquos clear area in the Standard Plans (where a clear 110 slope required)

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals

CREDIT VIRGINIA DOT ndash SKT Crash Test Published October 2016

httpswwwyoutubecomwatchv=74ImLTY-PhUampfeature=youtube

YES Wrong

First issuehellipTrees are within the Approach Terminalrsquos clear area in the Standard Plans (where a clear 110 slope required)

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach TerminalsYES Wrong

First issuehellipTrees are within the Approach Terminalrsquos clear area in the Standard Plans (where a clear 110 slope required)

From Standard Planshellip

Guardrail Index 536-001

YES Wrong

Second issuehellipTree violates barrier setback per FDM Table 21542

Guardrail Index 536-001

YES Wrong

Second issuehellipTree violates barrier setback per FDM Table 21542

From FDMhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Any issue hereYES Wrong

First issuehellipPerpendicular guardrail is not proven crashworthybull No end treatmentsbull Violates ldquotaper raterdquo

requirements of SPI Part I (big time)

bull Requires shielding if within Clear Zone

Answerhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Any issue hereYES Wrong

Second issuehellipPerpendicular guardrail within the Approach Terminalrsquos clear area in the Standard Plans (where a clear 110 slope required)

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Any issue hereYES Wrong

Third issuehellipPerpendicular guardrail violates barrier setback per FDM Table 21542

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Solution 1

REMOVE theperpendicularGuardrail

Orhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Solution 2

1 Extend Guardrail to meet Length of Need per SPI Part B (Excel lsquoDesign Toolrsquo) which is Roadside Design Guide Eq 5-3

2 Meet minimum barrier setback per FDM Table 21542 (5 feet for general guardrail)

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Final Case StudyAssumptionsbull Design Speed

50 mph

bull Piers designed to withstand 600 kip impact load per FDM215454(Pier Protection Barrier notRequired)

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereAnswerhellip YES

First issuehellipPiers NOT shielded

ldquoLength of Needrdquo NOT met per SPI Part B (Excel Design Tool)

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereAnswerhellip YES

First issuehellipPiers NOT shielded

ldquoLength of Needrdquo NOT met per SPI Part B (Excel Design Tool)

Piers are behind the ldquogatingrdquo(break-away) portion of Approach Terminal

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereYES

Second issuehellipFlared Terminal usage on hold per RDB18-02

Regardlesshellip ldquoTaper Raterdquo too steep here at Approach Terminal (about 13 shown)

Guardrail requires 115 Max Taper Rate per SPI Part I

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereAnswerhellip YES

Third issuehellipldquoBarrier Setbackrdquo requirement likely not satisfied

per FDM Table 21542(5 feet or greater)hellip

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereYES

Fourth issuehellipldquoTrailing Anchoragerdquo not properly extended downstream of hazard

25-foot Requirement SPI C1 amp lsquoLONrsquo Design Tool (Excel)hellip

Answerhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereYES

Fourth issuehellipldquoTrailing Anchoragerdquo not properly extended downstream of hazard

25-foot Requirement SPI C1 amp lsquoLONrsquo Design Tool (Excel)hellip

AnswerhellipFrom lsquoLength of Needrsquo Excel Sheethellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Crash Cushion Index 544-001

Approach Terminals Solution 1lsquoCrash Cushionrsquobull ldquoSystem Widthrdquo ndash

lsquoWidersquo per SPI 544-001 Part C

bull ldquoLength Restrictionrdquo - per SPI 544-001 Part F

bull Contact Central Office for guidance

Note Define Crash Cushion with provided CADD cellhellipldquoSummary of Permanent Crash Cushions Tablerdquo

Guardrail Index 536-001 Crash Cushion Index 544-001

Approach Terminals Solution 1lsquoCrash Cushionrsquobull Guardrail ldquoreduced

post spacingrdquo to reduce required hazard setback per FDM Table 21542

bull Again contact Central Office for guidance for such limited space

Concrete Barrier Index 521-001 Crash Cushion 544-001

Approach Terminals Solution 2lsquoConcrete Barrierrsquo amp lsquoCrash Cushionrsquo

bull Requires project-specific design

bull Contact Central Office for guidance for such limited space

Questions

Richard Stepp PEStandard Plans Engineer

Central Office Roadway Design(850) 414-4313

richardsteppdotstateflus

Standard Plans Single-Slope Barriers

Page 13: Roadside Barriers - MASH Implementation Update & Design ... · Roadside Barriers - Lessons Learned 1. GUARDRAIL Standard Plans, Index 536-001 2. CONCRETE BARRIER Standard Plans, Index

CRT System (Radial) Any issue here

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 11 amp 12

AnswerhellipYES

First IssueObstruction is in the ldquoClear Area Limitrdquo per Standard Plans

(Controlled Release Terminal)

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 11 amp 12

CRT System (Radial)AnswerhellipYES

First IssueObstruction is in the ldquoClear Area Limitrdquo per Standard Plans

Photo Credit Bill Fitzgerald PEKLS Engineering LLC

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 11 amp 12

bull ldquoClear Areardquo Required (15rsquox30rsquo)

bull ldquoClear Areardquo is free of obstructions and has 12 Slope Max

CRT System (Radial) From Standard Planshellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 11 amp 12

Requires 25-footlinear End TreatmentPer Standard Plans

(12rsquo-6rdquo Shown)

CRT System (Radial) Any other issue here

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 11 amp 12

bull 25-foot linear End Treatment required

bull If this is not possible due limited space use a lsquovariationrsquo for General Radial Guardrail (Not CRT)(No breakaway posts)

CRT System (Radial) Per Standard Planshellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheet 20

Pipe Rail Callouts Any issue hereAnswerhellip YES

Pipe Rail must terminate outside of End Treatments per SPI Part E and Standard PlansSolution

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 13-15

Rigid Barrier Connections End Shielding

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 13-15

Rigid Barrier Connection Any Issue HereAnswerhellip YES

asymp13 foot overlap with barrier is no longer Standard

(Overlap now only 7frac14rdquo Since FY2017-18 Standards for newsingle-faced guardrail)

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 13-15

Rigid Barrier Connection Any Issues HereYES

asymp13 foot overlap with barrier is no longer Standard

(Overlap now only 7frac14rdquo Since FY2017-18 Standards for newsingle-faced guardrail)

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 13-15

Rigid Barrier Connection Any Issues Here

Solution

YES

asymp13 foot overlap with barrier is no longer Standard

(Overlap now only 7frac14rdquo Since FY2017-18 Standards for newsingle-faced guardrail)

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8 13-14

Answerhellip

YES

Guardrail system ishellip

not long enough

Rigid Barrier Connection Any issue here

Minimum Length is Length of Approach Transition Connection lsquoLArsquoplus Length of End Treatment lsquoLErsquo

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8 13-14

Rigid Barrier End Shielding Min Length TL-2

lsquoLArsquo 213rsquo

+lsquoLErsquo 406rsquo

=

62rsquo

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8 13-14

Rigid Barrier End Shielding Min Length TL-2

lsquoLArsquo 213rsquo

+lsquoLErsquo 406rsquo

=

62rsquo

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8 13-14

Rigid Barrier End Shielding Min Length TL-3

lsquoLArsquo 306rsquo

+lsquoLErsquo 531rsquo

=

84rsquo

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8 13-14

Rigid Barrier End Shielding Min Length TL-3

lsquoLArsquo 306rsquo

+lsquoLErsquo 531rsquo

=

84rsquoNOTE If these lengths are not possible due to limited space consider the use of a Crash Cushion or a project-specific lsquovariationrsquo to fit the best barrier system possible

Contact Central Office for assistance

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Any issues hereAnswerhellip YES

1 Flared terminals not permitted per RDB18-02

2 Curbed conditions require parallel Approach Terminals per Standard Plans ampSPI Part C3 Approach Terminals require lsquoType Ersquo Curb

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals

From Standard Planshellip

Answerhellip YES

1 Flared terminals not permitted per RDB18-02

2 Curbed conditions require parallel Approach Terminals per Standard Plans ampSPI Part C3 Approach Terminals require lsquoType Ersquo Curb

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Solution

1 Flared terminals not permitted per RDB18-02

2 Curbed conditions require parallel Approach Terminals per Standard Plans

3 Approach Terminals require lsquoType Ersquo Curb

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Any issues hereYES Wrong

First issuehellipFront slope break should be 6 feet behind guardrail face at post 1 per the Standards (110 Max)

Second issuehellipMisc Asphalt should extend 10 feet upstream of post 1 per Standards

Answerhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach TerminalsYES Wrong

First issuehellipFront slope break should be 6 feet behind guardrail face at post 1 per the Standards (110 Min)

Second issuehellipMisc Asphalt should extend 10 feet upstream of post 1 per Standards

Answerhellip

From Standard Planshellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach TerminalsYES Wrong

First issuehellipFront slope break should be 6 feet behind guardrail face at post 1 per the Standards (110 Min)

Second issuehellipMisc Asphalt should extend 10 feet upstream of post 1 per Standards

Answerhellip

Example of Poor Slope Break Location (and steep slope not shielded)

Photo Credit Bill Fitzgerald PE

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach TerminalsYES Wrong

First issuehellipFront slope break should be 6 feet behind guardrail face at post 1 per the Standards (110 Min)

Second issuehellipMisc Asphalt should extend 10 feet upstream of post 1 per Standards

Answerhellip

Example of Poor Grading (The reason for Misc Asphalt requirement)

Photo Credit Bill Fitzgerald PE

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals SolutionYES Wrong

First issuehellipFront slope break should be 6 feet behind guardrail face at post 1 per the Standards (110 Min)

Second issuehellipMisc Asphalt should extend 10 feet upstream of post 1 per Standards

Answerhellip

Correctedhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Any issues hereYES Wrong

First issuehellipTrees are within the Approach Terminalrsquos clear area in the Standard Plans (where a clear 110 slope required)

Second issuehellipTree violates barrier setback per FDM Table 21542

Answerhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Any issues hereYES Wrong

First issuehellipTrees are within the Approach Terminalrsquos clear area in the Standard Plans (where a clear 110 slope required)

Second issuehellipTree violates barrier setback per FDM Table 21542

Answerhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach TerminalsYES Wrong

First issuehellipTrees are within the Approach Terminalrsquos clear area in the Standard Plans (where a clear 110 slope required)

From Standard Planshellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals

CREDIT VIRGINIA DOT ndash SKT Crash Test Published October 2016

httpswwwyoutubecomwatchv=OsKlfatcjogampfeature=youtube

httpswwwyoutubecomwatchv=h7tct7Oo9-8ampfeature=youtube

YES Wrong

First issuehellipTrees are within the Approach Terminalrsquos clear area in the Standard Plans (where a clear 110 slope required)

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals

CREDIT VIRGINIA DOT ndash SKT Crash Test Published October 2016

httpswwwyoutubecomwatchv=74ImLTY-PhUampfeature=youtube

YES Wrong

First issuehellipTrees are within the Approach Terminalrsquos clear area in the Standard Plans (where a clear 110 slope required)

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach TerminalsYES Wrong

First issuehellipTrees are within the Approach Terminalrsquos clear area in the Standard Plans (where a clear 110 slope required)

From Standard Planshellip

Guardrail Index 536-001

YES Wrong

Second issuehellipTree violates barrier setback per FDM Table 21542

Guardrail Index 536-001

YES Wrong

Second issuehellipTree violates barrier setback per FDM Table 21542

From FDMhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Any issue hereYES Wrong

First issuehellipPerpendicular guardrail is not proven crashworthybull No end treatmentsbull Violates ldquotaper raterdquo

requirements of SPI Part I (big time)

bull Requires shielding if within Clear Zone

Answerhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Any issue hereYES Wrong

Second issuehellipPerpendicular guardrail within the Approach Terminalrsquos clear area in the Standard Plans (where a clear 110 slope required)

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Any issue hereYES Wrong

Third issuehellipPerpendicular guardrail violates barrier setback per FDM Table 21542

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Solution 1

REMOVE theperpendicularGuardrail

Orhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Solution 2

1 Extend Guardrail to meet Length of Need per SPI Part B (Excel lsquoDesign Toolrsquo) which is Roadside Design Guide Eq 5-3

2 Meet minimum barrier setback per FDM Table 21542 (5 feet for general guardrail)

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Final Case StudyAssumptionsbull Design Speed

50 mph

bull Piers designed to withstand 600 kip impact load per FDM215454(Pier Protection Barrier notRequired)

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereAnswerhellip YES

First issuehellipPiers NOT shielded

ldquoLength of Needrdquo NOT met per SPI Part B (Excel Design Tool)

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereAnswerhellip YES

First issuehellipPiers NOT shielded

ldquoLength of Needrdquo NOT met per SPI Part B (Excel Design Tool)

Piers are behind the ldquogatingrdquo(break-away) portion of Approach Terminal

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereYES

Second issuehellipFlared Terminal usage on hold per RDB18-02

Regardlesshellip ldquoTaper Raterdquo too steep here at Approach Terminal (about 13 shown)

Guardrail requires 115 Max Taper Rate per SPI Part I

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereAnswerhellip YES

Third issuehellipldquoBarrier Setbackrdquo requirement likely not satisfied

per FDM Table 21542(5 feet or greater)hellip

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereYES

Fourth issuehellipldquoTrailing Anchoragerdquo not properly extended downstream of hazard

25-foot Requirement SPI C1 amp lsquoLONrsquo Design Tool (Excel)hellip

Answerhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereYES

Fourth issuehellipldquoTrailing Anchoragerdquo not properly extended downstream of hazard

25-foot Requirement SPI C1 amp lsquoLONrsquo Design Tool (Excel)hellip

AnswerhellipFrom lsquoLength of Needrsquo Excel Sheethellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Crash Cushion Index 544-001

Approach Terminals Solution 1lsquoCrash Cushionrsquobull ldquoSystem Widthrdquo ndash

lsquoWidersquo per SPI 544-001 Part C

bull ldquoLength Restrictionrdquo - per SPI 544-001 Part F

bull Contact Central Office for guidance

Note Define Crash Cushion with provided CADD cellhellipldquoSummary of Permanent Crash Cushions Tablerdquo

Guardrail Index 536-001 Crash Cushion Index 544-001

Approach Terminals Solution 1lsquoCrash Cushionrsquobull Guardrail ldquoreduced

post spacingrdquo to reduce required hazard setback per FDM Table 21542

bull Again contact Central Office for guidance for such limited space

Concrete Barrier Index 521-001 Crash Cushion 544-001

Approach Terminals Solution 2lsquoConcrete Barrierrsquo amp lsquoCrash Cushionrsquo

bull Requires project-specific design

bull Contact Central Office for guidance for such limited space

Questions

Richard Stepp PEStandard Plans Engineer

Central Office Roadway Design(850) 414-4313

richardsteppdotstateflus

Standard Plans Single-Slope Barriers

Page 14: Roadside Barriers - MASH Implementation Update & Design ... · Roadside Barriers - Lessons Learned 1. GUARDRAIL Standard Plans, Index 536-001 2. CONCRETE BARRIER Standard Plans, Index

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 11 amp 12

CRT System (Radial)AnswerhellipYES

First IssueObstruction is in the ldquoClear Area Limitrdquo per Standard Plans

Photo Credit Bill Fitzgerald PEKLS Engineering LLC

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 11 amp 12

bull ldquoClear Areardquo Required (15rsquox30rsquo)

bull ldquoClear Areardquo is free of obstructions and has 12 Slope Max

CRT System (Radial) From Standard Planshellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 11 amp 12

Requires 25-footlinear End TreatmentPer Standard Plans

(12rsquo-6rdquo Shown)

CRT System (Radial) Any other issue here

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 11 amp 12

bull 25-foot linear End Treatment required

bull If this is not possible due limited space use a lsquovariationrsquo for General Radial Guardrail (Not CRT)(No breakaway posts)

CRT System (Radial) Per Standard Planshellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheet 20

Pipe Rail Callouts Any issue hereAnswerhellip YES

Pipe Rail must terminate outside of End Treatments per SPI Part E and Standard PlansSolution

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 13-15

Rigid Barrier Connections End Shielding

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 13-15

Rigid Barrier Connection Any Issue HereAnswerhellip YES

asymp13 foot overlap with barrier is no longer Standard

(Overlap now only 7frac14rdquo Since FY2017-18 Standards for newsingle-faced guardrail)

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 13-15

Rigid Barrier Connection Any Issues HereYES

asymp13 foot overlap with barrier is no longer Standard

(Overlap now only 7frac14rdquo Since FY2017-18 Standards for newsingle-faced guardrail)

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 13-15

Rigid Barrier Connection Any Issues Here

Solution

YES

asymp13 foot overlap with barrier is no longer Standard

(Overlap now only 7frac14rdquo Since FY2017-18 Standards for newsingle-faced guardrail)

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8 13-14

Answerhellip

YES

Guardrail system ishellip

not long enough

Rigid Barrier Connection Any issue here

Minimum Length is Length of Approach Transition Connection lsquoLArsquoplus Length of End Treatment lsquoLErsquo

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8 13-14

Rigid Barrier End Shielding Min Length TL-2

lsquoLArsquo 213rsquo

+lsquoLErsquo 406rsquo

=

62rsquo

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8 13-14

Rigid Barrier End Shielding Min Length TL-2

lsquoLArsquo 213rsquo

+lsquoLErsquo 406rsquo

=

62rsquo

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8 13-14

Rigid Barrier End Shielding Min Length TL-3

lsquoLArsquo 306rsquo

+lsquoLErsquo 531rsquo

=

84rsquo

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8 13-14

Rigid Barrier End Shielding Min Length TL-3

lsquoLArsquo 306rsquo

+lsquoLErsquo 531rsquo

=

84rsquoNOTE If these lengths are not possible due to limited space consider the use of a Crash Cushion or a project-specific lsquovariationrsquo to fit the best barrier system possible

Contact Central Office for assistance

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Any issues hereAnswerhellip YES

1 Flared terminals not permitted per RDB18-02

2 Curbed conditions require parallel Approach Terminals per Standard Plans ampSPI Part C3 Approach Terminals require lsquoType Ersquo Curb

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals

From Standard Planshellip

Answerhellip YES

1 Flared terminals not permitted per RDB18-02

2 Curbed conditions require parallel Approach Terminals per Standard Plans ampSPI Part C3 Approach Terminals require lsquoType Ersquo Curb

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Solution

1 Flared terminals not permitted per RDB18-02

2 Curbed conditions require parallel Approach Terminals per Standard Plans

3 Approach Terminals require lsquoType Ersquo Curb

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Any issues hereYES Wrong

First issuehellipFront slope break should be 6 feet behind guardrail face at post 1 per the Standards (110 Max)

Second issuehellipMisc Asphalt should extend 10 feet upstream of post 1 per Standards

Answerhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach TerminalsYES Wrong

First issuehellipFront slope break should be 6 feet behind guardrail face at post 1 per the Standards (110 Min)

Second issuehellipMisc Asphalt should extend 10 feet upstream of post 1 per Standards

Answerhellip

From Standard Planshellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach TerminalsYES Wrong

First issuehellipFront slope break should be 6 feet behind guardrail face at post 1 per the Standards (110 Min)

Second issuehellipMisc Asphalt should extend 10 feet upstream of post 1 per Standards

Answerhellip

Example of Poor Slope Break Location (and steep slope not shielded)

Photo Credit Bill Fitzgerald PE

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach TerminalsYES Wrong

First issuehellipFront slope break should be 6 feet behind guardrail face at post 1 per the Standards (110 Min)

Second issuehellipMisc Asphalt should extend 10 feet upstream of post 1 per Standards

Answerhellip

Example of Poor Grading (The reason for Misc Asphalt requirement)

Photo Credit Bill Fitzgerald PE

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals SolutionYES Wrong

First issuehellipFront slope break should be 6 feet behind guardrail face at post 1 per the Standards (110 Min)

Second issuehellipMisc Asphalt should extend 10 feet upstream of post 1 per Standards

Answerhellip

Correctedhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Any issues hereYES Wrong

First issuehellipTrees are within the Approach Terminalrsquos clear area in the Standard Plans (where a clear 110 slope required)

Second issuehellipTree violates barrier setback per FDM Table 21542

Answerhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Any issues hereYES Wrong

First issuehellipTrees are within the Approach Terminalrsquos clear area in the Standard Plans (where a clear 110 slope required)

Second issuehellipTree violates barrier setback per FDM Table 21542

Answerhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach TerminalsYES Wrong

First issuehellipTrees are within the Approach Terminalrsquos clear area in the Standard Plans (where a clear 110 slope required)

From Standard Planshellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals

CREDIT VIRGINIA DOT ndash SKT Crash Test Published October 2016

httpswwwyoutubecomwatchv=OsKlfatcjogampfeature=youtube

httpswwwyoutubecomwatchv=h7tct7Oo9-8ampfeature=youtube

YES Wrong

First issuehellipTrees are within the Approach Terminalrsquos clear area in the Standard Plans (where a clear 110 slope required)

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals

CREDIT VIRGINIA DOT ndash SKT Crash Test Published October 2016

httpswwwyoutubecomwatchv=74ImLTY-PhUampfeature=youtube

YES Wrong

First issuehellipTrees are within the Approach Terminalrsquos clear area in the Standard Plans (where a clear 110 slope required)

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach TerminalsYES Wrong

First issuehellipTrees are within the Approach Terminalrsquos clear area in the Standard Plans (where a clear 110 slope required)

From Standard Planshellip

Guardrail Index 536-001

YES Wrong

Second issuehellipTree violates barrier setback per FDM Table 21542

Guardrail Index 536-001

YES Wrong

Second issuehellipTree violates barrier setback per FDM Table 21542

From FDMhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Any issue hereYES Wrong

First issuehellipPerpendicular guardrail is not proven crashworthybull No end treatmentsbull Violates ldquotaper raterdquo

requirements of SPI Part I (big time)

bull Requires shielding if within Clear Zone

Answerhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Any issue hereYES Wrong

Second issuehellipPerpendicular guardrail within the Approach Terminalrsquos clear area in the Standard Plans (where a clear 110 slope required)

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Any issue hereYES Wrong

Third issuehellipPerpendicular guardrail violates barrier setback per FDM Table 21542

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Solution 1

REMOVE theperpendicularGuardrail

Orhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Solution 2

1 Extend Guardrail to meet Length of Need per SPI Part B (Excel lsquoDesign Toolrsquo) which is Roadside Design Guide Eq 5-3

2 Meet minimum barrier setback per FDM Table 21542 (5 feet for general guardrail)

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Final Case StudyAssumptionsbull Design Speed

50 mph

bull Piers designed to withstand 600 kip impact load per FDM215454(Pier Protection Barrier notRequired)

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereAnswerhellip YES

First issuehellipPiers NOT shielded

ldquoLength of Needrdquo NOT met per SPI Part B (Excel Design Tool)

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereAnswerhellip YES

First issuehellipPiers NOT shielded

ldquoLength of Needrdquo NOT met per SPI Part B (Excel Design Tool)

Piers are behind the ldquogatingrdquo(break-away) portion of Approach Terminal

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereYES

Second issuehellipFlared Terminal usage on hold per RDB18-02

Regardlesshellip ldquoTaper Raterdquo too steep here at Approach Terminal (about 13 shown)

Guardrail requires 115 Max Taper Rate per SPI Part I

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereAnswerhellip YES

Third issuehellipldquoBarrier Setbackrdquo requirement likely not satisfied

per FDM Table 21542(5 feet or greater)hellip

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereYES

Fourth issuehellipldquoTrailing Anchoragerdquo not properly extended downstream of hazard

25-foot Requirement SPI C1 amp lsquoLONrsquo Design Tool (Excel)hellip

Answerhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereYES

Fourth issuehellipldquoTrailing Anchoragerdquo not properly extended downstream of hazard

25-foot Requirement SPI C1 amp lsquoLONrsquo Design Tool (Excel)hellip

AnswerhellipFrom lsquoLength of Needrsquo Excel Sheethellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Crash Cushion Index 544-001

Approach Terminals Solution 1lsquoCrash Cushionrsquobull ldquoSystem Widthrdquo ndash

lsquoWidersquo per SPI 544-001 Part C

bull ldquoLength Restrictionrdquo - per SPI 544-001 Part F

bull Contact Central Office for guidance

Note Define Crash Cushion with provided CADD cellhellipldquoSummary of Permanent Crash Cushions Tablerdquo

Guardrail Index 536-001 Crash Cushion Index 544-001

Approach Terminals Solution 1lsquoCrash Cushionrsquobull Guardrail ldquoreduced

post spacingrdquo to reduce required hazard setback per FDM Table 21542

bull Again contact Central Office for guidance for such limited space

Concrete Barrier Index 521-001 Crash Cushion 544-001

Approach Terminals Solution 2lsquoConcrete Barrierrsquo amp lsquoCrash Cushionrsquo

bull Requires project-specific design

bull Contact Central Office for guidance for such limited space

Questions

Richard Stepp PEStandard Plans Engineer

Central Office Roadway Design(850) 414-4313

richardsteppdotstateflus

Standard Plans Single-Slope Barriers

Page 15: Roadside Barriers - MASH Implementation Update & Design ... · Roadside Barriers - Lessons Learned 1. GUARDRAIL Standard Plans, Index 536-001 2. CONCRETE BARRIER Standard Plans, Index

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 11 amp 12

bull ldquoClear Areardquo Required (15rsquox30rsquo)

bull ldquoClear Areardquo is free of obstructions and has 12 Slope Max

CRT System (Radial) From Standard Planshellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 11 amp 12

Requires 25-footlinear End TreatmentPer Standard Plans

(12rsquo-6rdquo Shown)

CRT System (Radial) Any other issue here

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 11 amp 12

bull 25-foot linear End Treatment required

bull If this is not possible due limited space use a lsquovariationrsquo for General Radial Guardrail (Not CRT)(No breakaway posts)

CRT System (Radial) Per Standard Planshellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheet 20

Pipe Rail Callouts Any issue hereAnswerhellip YES

Pipe Rail must terminate outside of End Treatments per SPI Part E and Standard PlansSolution

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 13-15

Rigid Barrier Connections End Shielding

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 13-15

Rigid Barrier Connection Any Issue HereAnswerhellip YES

asymp13 foot overlap with barrier is no longer Standard

(Overlap now only 7frac14rdquo Since FY2017-18 Standards for newsingle-faced guardrail)

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 13-15

Rigid Barrier Connection Any Issues HereYES

asymp13 foot overlap with barrier is no longer Standard

(Overlap now only 7frac14rdquo Since FY2017-18 Standards for newsingle-faced guardrail)

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 13-15

Rigid Barrier Connection Any Issues Here

Solution

YES

asymp13 foot overlap with barrier is no longer Standard

(Overlap now only 7frac14rdquo Since FY2017-18 Standards for newsingle-faced guardrail)

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8 13-14

Answerhellip

YES

Guardrail system ishellip

not long enough

Rigid Barrier Connection Any issue here

Minimum Length is Length of Approach Transition Connection lsquoLArsquoplus Length of End Treatment lsquoLErsquo

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8 13-14

Rigid Barrier End Shielding Min Length TL-2

lsquoLArsquo 213rsquo

+lsquoLErsquo 406rsquo

=

62rsquo

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8 13-14

Rigid Barrier End Shielding Min Length TL-2

lsquoLArsquo 213rsquo

+lsquoLErsquo 406rsquo

=

62rsquo

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8 13-14

Rigid Barrier End Shielding Min Length TL-3

lsquoLArsquo 306rsquo

+lsquoLErsquo 531rsquo

=

84rsquo

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8 13-14

Rigid Barrier End Shielding Min Length TL-3

lsquoLArsquo 306rsquo

+lsquoLErsquo 531rsquo

=

84rsquoNOTE If these lengths are not possible due to limited space consider the use of a Crash Cushion or a project-specific lsquovariationrsquo to fit the best barrier system possible

Contact Central Office for assistance

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Any issues hereAnswerhellip YES

1 Flared terminals not permitted per RDB18-02

2 Curbed conditions require parallel Approach Terminals per Standard Plans ampSPI Part C3 Approach Terminals require lsquoType Ersquo Curb

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals

From Standard Planshellip

Answerhellip YES

1 Flared terminals not permitted per RDB18-02

2 Curbed conditions require parallel Approach Terminals per Standard Plans ampSPI Part C3 Approach Terminals require lsquoType Ersquo Curb

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Solution

1 Flared terminals not permitted per RDB18-02

2 Curbed conditions require parallel Approach Terminals per Standard Plans

3 Approach Terminals require lsquoType Ersquo Curb

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Any issues hereYES Wrong

First issuehellipFront slope break should be 6 feet behind guardrail face at post 1 per the Standards (110 Max)

Second issuehellipMisc Asphalt should extend 10 feet upstream of post 1 per Standards

Answerhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach TerminalsYES Wrong

First issuehellipFront slope break should be 6 feet behind guardrail face at post 1 per the Standards (110 Min)

Second issuehellipMisc Asphalt should extend 10 feet upstream of post 1 per Standards

Answerhellip

From Standard Planshellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach TerminalsYES Wrong

First issuehellipFront slope break should be 6 feet behind guardrail face at post 1 per the Standards (110 Min)

Second issuehellipMisc Asphalt should extend 10 feet upstream of post 1 per Standards

Answerhellip

Example of Poor Slope Break Location (and steep slope not shielded)

Photo Credit Bill Fitzgerald PE

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach TerminalsYES Wrong

First issuehellipFront slope break should be 6 feet behind guardrail face at post 1 per the Standards (110 Min)

Second issuehellipMisc Asphalt should extend 10 feet upstream of post 1 per Standards

Answerhellip

Example of Poor Grading (The reason for Misc Asphalt requirement)

Photo Credit Bill Fitzgerald PE

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals SolutionYES Wrong

First issuehellipFront slope break should be 6 feet behind guardrail face at post 1 per the Standards (110 Min)

Second issuehellipMisc Asphalt should extend 10 feet upstream of post 1 per Standards

Answerhellip

Correctedhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Any issues hereYES Wrong

First issuehellipTrees are within the Approach Terminalrsquos clear area in the Standard Plans (where a clear 110 slope required)

Second issuehellipTree violates barrier setback per FDM Table 21542

Answerhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Any issues hereYES Wrong

First issuehellipTrees are within the Approach Terminalrsquos clear area in the Standard Plans (where a clear 110 slope required)

Second issuehellipTree violates barrier setback per FDM Table 21542

Answerhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach TerminalsYES Wrong

First issuehellipTrees are within the Approach Terminalrsquos clear area in the Standard Plans (where a clear 110 slope required)

From Standard Planshellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals

CREDIT VIRGINIA DOT ndash SKT Crash Test Published October 2016

httpswwwyoutubecomwatchv=OsKlfatcjogampfeature=youtube

httpswwwyoutubecomwatchv=h7tct7Oo9-8ampfeature=youtube

YES Wrong

First issuehellipTrees are within the Approach Terminalrsquos clear area in the Standard Plans (where a clear 110 slope required)

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals

CREDIT VIRGINIA DOT ndash SKT Crash Test Published October 2016

httpswwwyoutubecomwatchv=74ImLTY-PhUampfeature=youtube

YES Wrong

First issuehellipTrees are within the Approach Terminalrsquos clear area in the Standard Plans (where a clear 110 slope required)

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach TerminalsYES Wrong

First issuehellipTrees are within the Approach Terminalrsquos clear area in the Standard Plans (where a clear 110 slope required)

From Standard Planshellip

Guardrail Index 536-001

YES Wrong

Second issuehellipTree violates barrier setback per FDM Table 21542

Guardrail Index 536-001

YES Wrong

Second issuehellipTree violates barrier setback per FDM Table 21542

From FDMhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Any issue hereYES Wrong

First issuehellipPerpendicular guardrail is not proven crashworthybull No end treatmentsbull Violates ldquotaper raterdquo

requirements of SPI Part I (big time)

bull Requires shielding if within Clear Zone

Answerhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Any issue hereYES Wrong

Second issuehellipPerpendicular guardrail within the Approach Terminalrsquos clear area in the Standard Plans (where a clear 110 slope required)

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Any issue hereYES Wrong

Third issuehellipPerpendicular guardrail violates barrier setback per FDM Table 21542

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Solution 1

REMOVE theperpendicularGuardrail

Orhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Solution 2

1 Extend Guardrail to meet Length of Need per SPI Part B (Excel lsquoDesign Toolrsquo) which is Roadside Design Guide Eq 5-3

2 Meet minimum barrier setback per FDM Table 21542 (5 feet for general guardrail)

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Final Case StudyAssumptionsbull Design Speed

50 mph

bull Piers designed to withstand 600 kip impact load per FDM215454(Pier Protection Barrier notRequired)

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereAnswerhellip YES

First issuehellipPiers NOT shielded

ldquoLength of Needrdquo NOT met per SPI Part B (Excel Design Tool)

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereAnswerhellip YES

First issuehellipPiers NOT shielded

ldquoLength of Needrdquo NOT met per SPI Part B (Excel Design Tool)

Piers are behind the ldquogatingrdquo(break-away) portion of Approach Terminal

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereYES

Second issuehellipFlared Terminal usage on hold per RDB18-02

Regardlesshellip ldquoTaper Raterdquo too steep here at Approach Terminal (about 13 shown)

Guardrail requires 115 Max Taper Rate per SPI Part I

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereAnswerhellip YES

Third issuehellipldquoBarrier Setbackrdquo requirement likely not satisfied

per FDM Table 21542(5 feet or greater)hellip

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereYES

Fourth issuehellipldquoTrailing Anchoragerdquo not properly extended downstream of hazard

25-foot Requirement SPI C1 amp lsquoLONrsquo Design Tool (Excel)hellip

Answerhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereYES

Fourth issuehellipldquoTrailing Anchoragerdquo not properly extended downstream of hazard

25-foot Requirement SPI C1 amp lsquoLONrsquo Design Tool (Excel)hellip

AnswerhellipFrom lsquoLength of Needrsquo Excel Sheethellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Crash Cushion Index 544-001

Approach Terminals Solution 1lsquoCrash Cushionrsquobull ldquoSystem Widthrdquo ndash

lsquoWidersquo per SPI 544-001 Part C

bull ldquoLength Restrictionrdquo - per SPI 544-001 Part F

bull Contact Central Office for guidance

Note Define Crash Cushion with provided CADD cellhellipldquoSummary of Permanent Crash Cushions Tablerdquo

Guardrail Index 536-001 Crash Cushion Index 544-001

Approach Terminals Solution 1lsquoCrash Cushionrsquobull Guardrail ldquoreduced

post spacingrdquo to reduce required hazard setback per FDM Table 21542

bull Again contact Central Office for guidance for such limited space

Concrete Barrier Index 521-001 Crash Cushion 544-001

Approach Terminals Solution 2lsquoConcrete Barrierrsquo amp lsquoCrash Cushionrsquo

bull Requires project-specific design

bull Contact Central Office for guidance for such limited space

Questions

Richard Stepp PEStandard Plans Engineer

Central Office Roadway Design(850) 414-4313

richardsteppdotstateflus

Standard Plans Single-Slope Barriers

Page 16: Roadside Barriers - MASH Implementation Update & Design ... · Roadside Barriers - Lessons Learned 1. GUARDRAIL Standard Plans, Index 536-001 2. CONCRETE BARRIER Standard Plans, Index

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 11 amp 12

Requires 25-footlinear End TreatmentPer Standard Plans

(12rsquo-6rdquo Shown)

CRT System (Radial) Any other issue here

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 11 amp 12

bull 25-foot linear End Treatment required

bull If this is not possible due limited space use a lsquovariationrsquo for General Radial Guardrail (Not CRT)(No breakaway posts)

CRT System (Radial) Per Standard Planshellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheet 20

Pipe Rail Callouts Any issue hereAnswerhellip YES

Pipe Rail must terminate outside of End Treatments per SPI Part E and Standard PlansSolution

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 13-15

Rigid Barrier Connections End Shielding

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 13-15

Rigid Barrier Connection Any Issue HereAnswerhellip YES

asymp13 foot overlap with barrier is no longer Standard

(Overlap now only 7frac14rdquo Since FY2017-18 Standards for newsingle-faced guardrail)

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 13-15

Rigid Barrier Connection Any Issues HereYES

asymp13 foot overlap with barrier is no longer Standard

(Overlap now only 7frac14rdquo Since FY2017-18 Standards for newsingle-faced guardrail)

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 13-15

Rigid Barrier Connection Any Issues Here

Solution

YES

asymp13 foot overlap with barrier is no longer Standard

(Overlap now only 7frac14rdquo Since FY2017-18 Standards for newsingle-faced guardrail)

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8 13-14

Answerhellip

YES

Guardrail system ishellip

not long enough

Rigid Barrier Connection Any issue here

Minimum Length is Length of Approach Transition Connection lsquoLArsquoplus Length of End Treatment lsquoLErsquo

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8 13-14

Rigid Barrier End Shielding Min Length TL-2

lsquoLArsquo 213rsquo

+lsquoLErsquo 406rsquo

=

62rsquo

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8 13-14

Rigid Barrier End Shielding Min Length TL-2

lsquoLArsquo 213rsquo

+lsquoLErsquo 406rsquo

=

62rsquo

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8 13-14

Rigid Barrier End Shielding Min Length TL-3

lsquoLArsquo 306rsquo

+lsquoLErsquo 531rsquo

=

84rsquo

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8 13-14

Rigid Barrier End Shielding Min Length TL-3

lsquoLArsquo 306rsquo

+lsquoLErsquo 531rsquo

=

84rsquoNOTE If these lengths are not possible due to limited space consider the use of a Crash Cushion or a project-specific lsquovariationrsquo to fit the best barrier system possible

Contact Central Office for assistance

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Any issues hereAnswerhellip YES

1 Flared terminals not permitted per RDB18-02

2 Curbed conditions require parallel Approach Terminals per Standard Plans ampSPI Part C3 Approach Terminals require lsquoType Ersquo Curb

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals

From Standard Planshellip

Answerhellip YES

1 Flared terminals not permitted per RDB18-02

2 Curbed conditions require parallel Approach Terminals per Standard Plans ampSPI Part C3 Approach Terminals require lsquoType Ersquo Curb

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Solution

1 Flared terminals not permitted per RDB18-02

2 Curbed conditions require parallel Approach Terminals per Standard Plans

3 Approach Terminals require lsquoType Ersquo Curb

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Any issues hereYES Wrong

First issuehellipFront slope break should be 6 feet behind guardrail face at post 1 per the Standards (110 Max)

Second issuehellipMisc Asphalt should extend 10 feet upstream of post 1 per Standards

Answerhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach TerminalsYES Wrong

First issuehellipFront slope break should be 6 feet behind guardrail face at post 1 per the Standards (110 Min)

Second issuehellipMisc Asphalt should extend 10 feet upstream of post 1 per Standards

Answerhellip

From Standard Planshellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach TerminalsYES Wrong

First issuehellipFront slope break should be 6 feet behind guardrail face at post 1 per the Standards (110 Min)

Second issuehellipMisc Asphalt should extend 10 feet upstream of post 1 per Standards

Answerhellip

Example of Poor Slope Break Location (and steep slope not shielded)

Photo Credit Bill Fitzgerald PE

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach TerminalsYES Wrong

First issuehellipFront slope break should be 6 feet behind guardrail face at post 1 per the Standards (110 Min)

Second issuehellipMisc Asphalt should extend 10 feet upstream of post 1 per Standards

Answerhellip

Example of Poor Grading (The reason for Misc Asphalt requirement)

Photo Credit Bill Fitzgerald PE

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals SolutionYES Wrong

First issuehellipFront slope break should be 6 feet behind guardrail face at post 1 per the Standards (110 Min)

Second issuehellipMisc Asphalt should extend 10 feet upstream of post 1 per Standards

Answerhellip

Correctedhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Any issues hereYES Wrong

First issuehellipTrees are within the Approach Terminalrsquos clear area in the Standard Plans (where a clear 110 slope required)

Second issuehellipTree violates barrier setback per FDM Table 21542

Answerhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Any issues hereYES Wrong

First issuehellipTrees are within the Approach Terminalrsquos clear area in the Standard Plans (where a clear 110 slope required)

Second issuehellipTree violates barrier setback per FDM Table 21542

Answerhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach TerminalsYES Wrong

First issuehellipTrees are within the Approach Terminalrsquos clear area in the Standard Plans (where a clear 110 slope required)

From Standard Planshellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals

CREDIT VIRGINIA DOT ndash SKT Crash Test Published October 2016

httpswwwyoutubecomwatchv=OsKlfatcjogampfeature=youtube

httpswwwyoutubecomwatchv=h7tct7Oo9-8ampfeature=youtube

YES Wrong

First issuehellipTrees are within the Approach Terminalrsquos clear area in the Standard Plans (where a clear 110 slope required)

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals

CREDIT VIRGINIA DOT ndash SKT Crash Test Published October 2016

httpswwwyoutubecomwatchv=74ImLTY-PhUampfeature=youtube

YES Wrong

First issuehellipTrees are within the Approach Terminalrsquos clear area in the Standard Plans (where a clear 110 slope required)

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach TerminalsYES Wrong

First issuehellipTrees are within the Approach Terminalrsquos clear area in the Standard Plans (where a clear 110 slope required)

From Standard Planshellip

Guardrail Index 536-001

YES Wrong

Second issuehellipTree violates barrier setback per FDM Table 21542

Guardrail Index 536-001

YES Wrong

Second issuehellipTree violates barrier setback per FDM Table 21542

From FDMhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Any issue hereYES Wrong

First issuehellipPerpendicular guardrail is not proven crashworthybull No end treatmentsbull Violates ldquotaper raterdquo

requirements of SPI Part I (big time)

bull Requires shielding if within Clear Zone

Answerhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Any issue hereYES Wrong

Second issuehellipPerpendicular guardrail within the Approach Terminalrsquos clear area in the Standard Plans (where a clear 110 slope required)

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Any issue hereYES Wrong

Third issuehellipPerpendicular guardrail violates barrier setback per FDM Table 21542

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Solution 1

REMOVE theperpendicularGuardrail

Orhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Solution 2

1 Extend Guardrail to meet Length of Need per SPI Part B (Excel lsquoDesign Toolrsquo) which is Roadside Design Guide Eq 5-3

2 Meet minimum barrier setback per FDM Table 21542 (5 feet for general guardrail)

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Final Case StudyAssumptionsbull Design Speed

50 mph

bull Piers designed to withstand 600 kip impact load per FDM215454(Pier Protection Barrier notRequired)

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereAnswerhellip YES

First issuehellipPiers NOT shielded

ldquoLength of Needrdquo NOT met per SPI Part B (Excel Design Tool)

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereAnswerhellip YES

First issuehellipPiers NOT shielded

ldquoLength of Needrdquo NOT met per SPI Part B (Excel Design Tool)

Piers are behind the ldquogatingrdquo(break-away) portion of Approach Terminal

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereYES

Second issuehellipFlared Terminal usage on hold per RDB18-02

Regardlesshellip ldquoTaper Raterdquo too steep here at Approach Terminal (about 13 shown)

Guardrail requires 115 Max Taper Rate per SPI Part I

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereAnswerhellip YES

Third issuehellipldquoBarrier Setbackrdquo requirement likely not satisfied

per FDM Table 21542(5 feet or greater)hellip

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereYES

Fourth issuehellipldquoTrailing Anchoragerdquo not properly extended downstream of hazard

25-foot Requirement SPI C1 amp lsquoLONrsquo Design Tool (Excel)hellip

Answerhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereYES

Fourth issuehellipldquoTrailing Anchoragerdquo not properly extended downstream of hazard

25-foot Requirement SPI C1 amp lsquoLONrsquo Design Tool (Excel)hellip

AnswerhellipFrom lsquoLength of Needrsquo Excel Sheethellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Crash Cushion Index 544-001

Approach Terminals Solution 1lsquoCrash Cushionrsquobull ldquoSystem Widthrdquo ndash

lsquoWidersquo per SPI 544-001 Part C

bull ldquoLength Restrictionrdquo - per SPI 544-001 Part F

bull Contact Central Office for guidance

Note Define Crash Cushion with provided CADD cellhellipldquoSummary of Permanent Crash Cushions Tablerdquo

Guardrail Index 536-001 Crash Cushion Index 544-001

Approach Terminals Solution 1lsquoCrash Cushionrsquobull Guardrail ldquoreduced

post spacingrdquo to reduce required hazard setback per FDM Table 21542

bull Again contact Central Office for guidance for such limited space

Concrete Barrier Index 521-001 Crash Cushion 544-001

Approach Terminals Solution 2lsquoConcrete Barrierrsquo amp lsquoCrash Cushionrsquo

bull Requires project-specific design

bull Contact Central Office for guidance for such limited space

Questions

Richard Stepp PEStandard Plans Engineer

Central Office Roadway Design(850) 414-4313

richardsteppdotstateflus

Standard Plans Single-Slope Barriers

Page 17: Roadside Barriers - MASH Implementation Update & Design ... · Roadside Barriers - Lessons Learned 1. GUARDRAIL Standard Plans, Index 536-001 2. CONCRETE BARRIER Standard Plans, Index

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 11 amp 12

bull 25-foot linear End Treatment required

bull If this is not possible due limited space use a lsquovariationrsquo for General Radial Guardrail (Not CRT)(No breakaway posts)

CRT System (Radial) Per Standard Planshellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheet 20

Pipe Rail Callouts Any issue hereAnswerhellip YES

Pipe Rail must terminate outside of End Treatments per SPI Part E and Standard PlansSolution

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 13-15

Rigid Barrier Connections End Shielding

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 13-15

Rigid Barrier Connection Any Issue HereAnswerhellip YES

asymp13 foot overlap with barrier is no longer Standard

(Overlap now only 7frac14rdquo Since FY2017-18 Standards for newsingle-faced guardrail)

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 13-15

Rigid Barrier Connection Any Issues HereYES

asymp13 foot overlap with barrier is no longer Standard

(Overlap now only 7frac14rdquo Since FY2017-18 Standards for newsingle-faced guardrail)

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 13-15

Rigid Barrier Connection Any Issues Here

Solution

YES

asymp13 foot overlap with barrier is no longer Standard

(Overlap now only 7frac14rdquo Since FY2017-18 Standards for newsingle-faced guardrail)

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8 13-14

Answerhellip

YES

Guardrail system ishellip

not long enough

Rigid Barrier Connection Any issue here

Minimum Length is Length of Approach Transition Connection lsquoLArsquoplus Length of End Treatment lsquoLErsquo

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8 13-14

Rigid Barrier End Shielding Min Length TL-2

lsquoLArsquo 213rsquo

+lsquoLErsquo 406rsquo

=

62rsquo

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8 13-14

Rigid Barrier End Shielding Min Length TL-2

lsquoLArsquo 213rsquo

+lsquoLErsquo 406rsquo

=

62rsquo

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8 13-14

Rigid Barrier End Shielding Min Length TL-3

lsquoLArsquo 306rsquo

+lsquoLErsquo 531rsquo

=

84rsquo

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8 13-14

Rigid Barrier End Shielding Min Length TL-3

lsquoLArsquo 306rsquo

+lsquoLErsquo 531rsquo

=

84rsquoNOTE If these lengths are not possible due to limited space consider the use of a Crash Cushion or a project-specific lsquovariationrsquo to fit the best barrier system possible

Contact Central Office for assistance

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Any issues hereAnswerhellip YES

1 Flared terminals not permitted per RDB18-02

2 Curbed conditions require parallel Approach Terminals per Standard Plans ampSPI Part C3 Approach Terminals require lsquoType Ersquo Curb

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals

From Standard Planshellip

Answerhellip YES

1 Flared terminals not permitted per RDB18-02

2 Curbed conditions require parallel Approach Terminals per Standard Plans ampSPI Part C3 Approach Terminals require lsquoType Ersquo Curb

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Solution

1 Flared terminals not permitted per RDB18-02

2 Curbed conditions require parallel Approach Terminals per Standard Plans

3 Approach Terminals require lsquoType Ersquo Curb

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Any issues hereYES Wrong

First issuehellipFront slope break should be 6 feet behind guardrail face at post 1 per the Standards (110 Max)

Second issuehellipMisc Asphalt should extend 10 feet upstream of post 1 per Standards

Answerhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach TerminalsYES Wrong

First issuehellipFront slope break should be 6 feet behind guardrail face at post 1 per the Standards (110 Min)

Second issuehellipMisc Asphalt should extend 10 feet upstream of post 1 per Standards

Answerhellip

From Standard Planshellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach TerminalsYES Wrong

First issuehellipFront slope break should be 6 feet behind guardrail face at post 1 per the Standards (110 Min)

Second issuehellipMisc Asphalt should extend 10 feet upstream of post 1 per Standards

Answerhellip

Example of Poor Slope Break Location (and steep slope not shielded)

Photo Credit Bill Fitzgerald PE

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach TerminalsYES Wrong

First issuehellipFront slope break should be 6 feet behind guardrail face at post 1 per the Standards (110 Min)

Second issuehellipMisc Asphalt should extend 10 feet upstream of post 1 per Standards

Answerhellip

Example of Poor Grading (The reason for Misc Asphalt requirement)

Photo Credit Bill Fitzgerald PE

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals SolutionYES Wrong

First issuehellipFront slope break should be 6 feet behind guardrail face at post 1 per the Standards (110 Min)

Second issuehellipMisc Asphalt should extend 10 feet upstream of post 1 per Standards

Answerhellip

Correctedhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Any issues hereYES Wrong

First issuehellipTrees are within the Approach Terminalrsquos clear area in the Standard Plans (where a clear 110 slope required)

Second issuehellipTree violates barrier setback per FDM Table 21542

Answerhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Any issues hereYES Wrong

First issuehellipTrees are within the Approach Terminalrsquos clear area in the Standard Plans (where a clear 110 slope required)

Second issuehellipTree violates barrier setback per FDM Table 21542

Answerhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach TerminalsYES Wrong

First issuehellipTrees are within the Approach Terminalrsquos clear area in the Standard Plans (where a clear 110 slope required)

From Standard Planshellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals

CREDIT VIRGINIA DOT ndash SKT Crash Test Published October 2016

httpswwwyoutubecomwatchv=OsKlfatcjogampfeature=youtube

httpswwwyoutubecomwatchv=h7tct7Oo9-8ampfeature=youtube

YES Wrong

First issuehellipTrees are within the Approach Terminalrsquos clear area in the Standard Plans (where a clear 110 slope required)

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals

CREDIT VIRGINIA DOT ndash SKT Crash Test Published October 2016

httpswwwyoutubecomwatchv=74ImLTY-PhUampfeature=youtube

YES Wrong

First issuehellipTrees are within the Approach Terminalrsquos clear area in the Standard Plans (where a clear 110 slope required)

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach TerminalsYES Wrong

First issuehellipTrees are within the Approach Terminalrsquos clear area in the Standard Plans (where a clear 110 slope required)

From Standard Planshellip

Guardrail Index 536-001

YES Wrong

Second issuehellipTree violates barrier setback per FDM Table 21542

Guardrail Index 536-001

YES Wrong

Second issuehellipTree violates barrier setback per FDM Table 21542

From FDMhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Any issue hereYES Wrong

First issuehellipPerpendicular guardrail is not proven crashworthybull No end treatmentsbull Violates ldquotaper raterdquo

requirements of SPI Part I (big time)

bull Requires shielding if within Clear Zone

Answerhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Any issue hereYES Wrong

Second issuehellipPerpendicular guardrail within the Approach Terminalrsquos clear area in the Standard Plans (where a clear 110 slope required)

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Any issue hereYES Wrong

Third issuehellipPerpendicular guardrail violates barrier setback per FDM Table 21542

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Solution 1

REMOVE theperpendicularGuardrail

Orhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Solution 2

1 Extend Guardrail to meet Length of Need per SPI Part B (Excel lsquoDesign Toolrsquo) which is Roadside Design Guide Eq 5-3

2 Meet minimum barrier setback per FDM Table 21542 (5 feet for general guardrail)

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Final Case StudyAssumptionsbull Design Speed

50 mph

bull Piers designed to withstand 600 kip impact load per FDM215454(Pier Protection Barrier notRequired)

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereAnswerhellip YES

First issuehellipPiers NOT shielded

ldquoLength of Needrdquo NOT met per SPI Part B (Excel Design Tool)

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereAnswerhellip YES

First issuehellipPiers NOT shielded

ldquoLength of Needrdquo NOT met per SPI Part B (Excel Design Tool)

Piers are behind the ldquogatingrdquo(break-away) portion of Approach Terminal

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereYES

Second issuehellipFlared Terminal usage on hold per RDB18-02

Regardlesshellip ldquoTaper Raterdquo too steep here at Approach Terminal (about 13 shown)

Guardrail requires 115 Max Taper Rate per SPI Part I

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereAnswerhellip YES

Third issuehellipldquoBarrier Setbackrdquo requirement likely not satisfied

per FDM Table 21542(5 feet or greater)hellip

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereYES

Fourth issuehellipldquoTrailing Anchoragerdquo not properly extended downstream of hazard

25-foot Requirement SPI C1 amp lsquoLONrsquo Design Tool (Excel)hellip

Answerhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereYES

Fourth issuehellipldquoTrailing Anchoragerdquo not properly extended downstream of hazard

25-foot Requirement SPI C1 amp lsquoLONrsquo Design Tool (Excel)hellip

AnswerhellipFrom lsquoLength of Needrsquo Excel Sheethellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Crash Cushion Index 544-001

Approach Terminals Solution 1lsquoCrash Cushionrsquobull ldquoSystem Widthrdquo ndash

lsquoWidersquo per SPI 544-001 Part C

bull ldquoLength Restrictionrdquo - per SPI 544-001 Part F

bull Contact Central Office for guidance

Note Define Crash Cushion with provided CADD cellhellipldquoSummary of Permanent Crash Cushions Tablerdquo

Guardrail Index 536-001 Crash Cushion Index 544-001

Approach Terminals Solution 1lsquoCrash Cushionrsquobull Guardrail ldquoreduced

post spacingrdquo to reduce required hazard setback per FDM Table 21542

bull Again contact Central Office for guidance for such limited space

Concrete Barrier Index 521-001 Crash Cushion 544-001

Approach Terminals Solution 2lsquoConcrete Barrierrsquo amp lsquoCrash Cushionrsquo

bull Requires project-specific design

bull Contact Central Office for guidance for such limited space

Questions

Richard Stepp PEStandard Plans Engineer

Central Office Roadway Design(850) 414-4313

richardsteppdotstateflus

Standard Plans Single-Slope Barriers

Page 18: Roadside Barriers - MASH Implementation Update & Design ... · Roadside Barriers - Lessons Learned 1. GUARDRAIL Standard Plans, Index 536-001 2. CONCRETE BARRIER Standard Plans, Index

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheet 20

Pipe Rail Callouts Any issue hereAnswerhellip YES

Pipe Rail must terminate outside of End Treatments per SPI Part E and Standard PlansSolution

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 13-15

Rigid Barrier Connections End Shielding

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 13-15

Rigid Barrier Connection Any Issue HereAnswerhellip YES

asymp13 foot overlap with barrier is no longer Standard

(Overlap now only 7frac14rdquo Since FY2017-18 Standards for newsingle-faced guardrail)

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 13-15

Rigid Barrier Connection Any Issues HereYES

asymp13 foot overlap with barrier is no longer Standard

(Overlap now only 7frac14rdquo Since FY2017-18 Standards for newsingle-faced guardrail)

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 13-15

Rigid Barrier Connection Any Issues Here

Solution

YES

asymp13 foot overlap with barrier is no longer Standard

(Overlap now only 7frac14rdquo Since FY2017-18 Standards for newsingle-faced guardrail)

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8 13-14

Answerhellip

YES

Guardrail system ishellip

not long enough

Rigid Barrier Connection Any issue here

Minimum Length is Length of Approach Transition Connection lsquoLArsquoplus Length of End Treatment lsquoLErsquo

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8 13-14

Rigid Barrier End Shielding Min Length TL-2

lsquoLArsquo 213rsquo

+lsquoLErsquo 406rsquo

=

62rsquo

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8 13-14

Rigid Barrier End Shielding Min Length TL-2

lsquoLArsquo 213rsquo

+lsquoLErsquo 406rsquo

=

62rsquo

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8 13-14

Rigid Barrier End Shielding Min Length TL-3

lsquoLArsquo 306rsquo

+lsquoLErsquo 531rsquo

=

84rsquo

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8 13-14

Rigid Barrier End Shielding Min Length TL-3

lsquoLArsquo 306rsquo

+lsquoLErsquo 531rsquo

=

84rsquoNOTE If these lengths are not possible due to limited space consider the use of a Crash Cushion or a project-specific lsquovariationrsquo to fit the best barrier system possible

Contact Central Office for assistance

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Any issues hereAnswerhellip YES

1 Flared terminals not permitted per RDB18-02

2 Curbed conditions require parallel Approach Terminals per Standard Plans ampSPI Part C3 Approach Terminals require lsquoType Ersquo Curb

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals

From Standard Planshellip

Answerhellip YES

1 Flared terminals not permitted per RDB18-02

2 Curbed conditions require parallel Approach Terminals per Standard Plans ampSPI Part C3 Approach Terminals require lsquoType Ersquo Curb

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Solution

1 Flared terminals not permitted per RDB18-02

2 Curbed conditions require parallel Approach Terminals per Standard Plans

3 Approach Terminals require lsquoType Ersquo Curb

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Any issues hereYES Wrong

First issuehellipFront slope break should be 6 feet behind guardrail face at post 1 per the Standards (110 Max)

Second issuehellipMisc Asphalt should extend 10 feet upstream of post 1 per Standards

Answerhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach TerminalsYES Wrong

First issuehellipFront slope break should be 6 feet behind guardrail face at post 1 per the Standards (110 Min)

Second issuehellipMisc Asphalt should extend 10 feet upstream of post 1 per Standards

Answerhellip

From Standard Planshellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach TerminalsYES Wrong

First issuehellipFront slope break should be 6 feet behind guardrail face at post 1 per the Standards (110 Min)

Second issuehellipMisc Asphalt should extend 10 feet upstream of post 1 per Standards

Answerhellip

Example of Poor Slope Break Location (and steep slope not shielded)

Photo Credit Bill Fitzgerald PE

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach TerminalsYES Wrong

First issuehellipFront slope break should be 6 feet behind guardrail face at post 1 per the Standards (110 Min)

Second issuehellipMisc Asphalt should extend 10 feet upstream of post 1 per Standards

Answerhellip

Example of Poor Grading (The reason for Misc Asphalt requirement)

Photo Credit Bill Fitzgerald PE

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals SolutionYES Wrong

First issuehellipFront slope break should be 6 feet behind guardrail face at post 1 per the Standards (110 Min)

Second issuehellipMisc Asphalt should extend 10 feet upstream of post 1 per Standards

Answerhellip

Correctedhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Any issues hereYES Wrong

First issuehellipTrees are within the Approach Terminalrsquos clear area in the Standard Plans (where a clear 110 slope required)

Second issuehellipTree violates barrier setback per FDM Table 21542

Answerhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Any issues hereYES Wrong

First issuehellipTrees are within the Approach Terminalrsquos clear area in the Standard Plans (where a clear 110 slope required)

Second issuehellipTree violates barrier setback per FDM Table 21542

Answerhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach TerminalsYES Wrong

First issuehellipTrees are within the Approach Terminalrsquos clear area in the Standard Plans (where a clear 110 slope required)

From Standard Planshellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals

CREDIT VIRGINIA DOT ndash SKT Crash Test Published October 2016

httpswwwyoutubecomwatchv=OsKlfatcjogampfeature=youtube

httpswwwyoutubecomwatchv=h7tct7Oo9-8ampfeature=youtube

YES Wrong

First issuehellipTrees are within the Approach Terminalrsquos clear area in the Standard Plans (where a clear 110 slope required)

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals

CREDIT VIRGINIA DOT ndash SKT Crash Test Published October 2016

httpswwwyoutubecomwatchv=74ImLTY-PhUampfeature=youtube

YES Wrong

First issuehellipTrees are within the Approach Terminalrsquos clear area in the Standard Plans (where a clear 110 slope required)

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach TerminalsYES Wrong

First issuehellipTrees are within the Approach Terminalrsquos clear area in the Standard Plans (where a clear 110 slope required)

From Standard Planshellip

Guardrail Index 536-001

YES Wrong

Second issuehellipTree violates barrier setback per FDM Table 21542

Guardrail Index 536-001

YES Wrong

Second issuehellipTree violates barrier setback per FDM Table 21542

From FDMhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Any issue hereYES Wrong

First issuehellipPerpendicular guardrail is not proven crashworthybull No end treatmentsbull Violates ldquotaper raterdquo

requirements of SPI Part I (big time)

bull Requires shielding if within Clear Zone

Answerhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Any issue hereYES Wrong

Second issuehellipPerpendicular guardrail within the Approach Terminalrsquos clear area in the Standard Plans (where a clear 110 slope required)

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Any issue hereYES Wrong

Third issuehellipPerpendicular guardrail violates barrier setback per FDM Table 21542

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Solution 1

REMOVE theperpendicularGuardrail

Orhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Solution 2

1 Extend Guardrail to meet Length of Need per SPI Part B (Excel lsquoDesign Toolrsquo) which is Roadside Design Guide Eq 5-3

2 Meet minimum barrier setback per FDM Table 21542 (5 feet for general guardrail)

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Final Case StudyAssumptionsbull Design Speed

50 mph

bull Piers designed to withstand 600 kip impact load per FDM215454(Pier Protection Barrier notRequired)

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereAnswerhellip YES

First issuehellipPiers NOT shielded

ldquoLength of Needrdquo NOT met per SPI Part B (Excel Design Tool)

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereAnswerhellip YES

First issuehellipPiers NOT shielded

ldquoLength of Needrdquo NOT met per SPI Part B (Excel Design Tool)

Piers are behind the ldquogatingrdquo(break-away) portion of Approach Terminal

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereYES

Second issuehellipFlared Terminal usage on hold per RDB18-02

Regardlesshellip ldquoTaper Raterdquo too steep here at Approach Terminal (about 13 shown)

Guardrail requires 115 Max Taper Rate per SPI Part I

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereAnswerhellip YES

Third issuehellipldquoBarrier Setbackrdquo requirement likely not satisfied

per FDM Table 21542(5 feet or greater)hellip

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereYES

Fourth issuehellipldquoTrailing Anchoragerdquo not properly extended downstream of hazard

25-foot Requirement SPI C1 amp lsquoLONrsquo Design Tool (Excel)hellip

Answerhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereYES

Fourth issuehellipldquoTrailing Anchoragerdquo not properly extended downstream of hazard

25-foot Requirement SPI C1 amp lsquoLONrsquo Design Tool (Excel)hellip

AnswerhellipFrom lsquoLength of Needrsquo Excel Sheethellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Crash Cushion Index 544-001

Approach Terminals Solution 1lsquoCrash Cushionrsquobull ldquoSystem Widthrdquo ndash

lsquoWidersquo per SPI 544-001 Part C

bull ldquoLength Restrictionrdquo - per SPI 544-001 Part F

bull Contact Central Office for guidance

Note Define Crash Cushion with provided CADD cellhellipldquoSummary of Permanent Crash Cushions Tablerdquo

Guardrail Index 536-001 Crash Cushion Index 544-001

Approach Terminals Solution 1lsquoCrash Cushionrsquobull Guardrail ldquoreduced

post spacingrdquo to reduce required hazard setback per FDM Table 21542

bull Again contact Central Office for guidance for such limited space

Concrete Barrier Index 521-001 Crash Cushion 544-001

Approach Terminals Solution 2lsquoConcrete Barrierrsquo amp lsquoCrash Cushionrsquo

bull Requires project-specific design

bull Contact Central Office for guidance for such limited space

Questions

Richard Stepp PEStandard Plans Engineer

Central Office Roadway Design(850) 414-4313

richardsteppdotstateflus

Standard Plans Single-Slope Barriers

Page 19: Roadside Barriers - MASH Implementation Update & Design ... · Roadside Barriers - Lessons Learned 1. GUARDRAIL Standard Plans, Index 536-001 2. CONCRETE BARRIER Standard Plans, Index

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 13-15

Rigid Barrier Connections End Shielding

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 13-15

Rigid Barrier Connection Any Issue HereAnswerhellip YES

asymp13 foot overlap with barrier is no longer Standard

(Overlap now only 7frac14rdquo Since FY2017-18 Standards for newsingle-faced guardrail)

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 13-15

Rigid Barrier Connection Any Issues HereYES

asymp13 foot overlap with barrier is no longer Standard

(Overlap now only 7frac14rdquo Since FY2017-18 Standards for newsingle-faced guardrail)

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 13-15

Rigid Barrier Connection Any Issues Here

Solution

YES

asymp13 foot overlap with barrier is no longer Standard

(Overlap now only 7frac14rdquo Since FY2017-18 Standards for newsingle-faced guardrail)

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8 13-14

Answerhellip

YES

Guardrail system ishellip

not long enough

Rigid Barrier Connection Any issue here

Minimum Length is Length of Approach Transition Connection lsquoLArsquoplus Length of End Treatment lsquoLErsquo

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8 13-14

Rigid Barrier End Shielding Min Length TL-2

lsquoLArsquo 213rsquo

+lsquoLErsquo 406rsquo

=

62rsquo

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8 13-14

Rigid Barrier End Shielding Min Length TL-2

lsquoLArsquo 213rsquo

+lsquoLErsquo 406rsquo

=

62rsquo

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8 13-14

Rigid Barrier End Shielding Min Length TL-3

lsquoLArsquo 306rsquo

+lsquoLErsquo 531rsquo

=

84rsquo

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8 13-14

Rigid Barrier End Shielding Min Length TL-3

lsquoLArsquo 306rsquo

+lsquoLErsquo 531rsquo

=

84rsquoNOTE If these lengths are not possible due to limited space consider the use of a Crash Cushion or a project-specific lsquovariationrsquo to fit the best barrier system possible

Contact Central Office for assistance

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Any issues hereAnswerhellip YES

1 Flared terminals not permitted per RDB18-02

2 Curbed conditions require parallel Approach Terminals per Standard Plans ampSPI Part C3 Approach Terminals require lsquoType Ersquo Curb

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals

From Standard Planshellip

Answerhellip YES

1 Flared terminals not permitted per RDB18-02

2 Curbed conditions require parallel Approach Terminals per Standard Plans ampSPI Part C3 Approach Terminals require lsquoType Ersquo Curb

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Solution

1 Flared terminals not permitted per RDB18-02

2 Curbed conditions require parallel Approach Terminals per Standard Plans

3 Approach Terminals require lsquoType Ersquo Curb

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Any issues hereYES Wrong

First issuehellipFront slope break should be 6 feet behind guardrail face at post 1 per the Standards (110 Max)

Second issuehellipMisc Asphalt should extend 10 feet upstream of post 1 per Standards

Answerhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach TerminalsYES Wrong

First issuehellipFront slope break should be 6 feet behind guardrail face at post 1 per the Standards (110 Min)

Second issuehellipMisc Asphalt should extend 10 feet upstream of post 1 per Standards

Answerhellip

From Standard Planshellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach TerminalsYES Wrong

First issuehellipFront slope break should be 6 feet behind guardrail face at post 1 per the Standards (110 Min)

Second issuehellipMisc Asphalt should extend 10 feet upstream of post 1 per Standards

Answerhellip

Example of Poor Slope Break Location (and steep slope not shielded)

Photo Credit Bill Fitzgerald PE

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach TerminalsYES Wrong

First issuehellipFront slope break should be 6 feet behind guardrail face at post 1 per the Standards (110 Min)

Second issuehellipMisc Asphalt should extend 10 feet upstream of post 1 per Standards

Answerhellip

Example of Poor Grading (The reason for Misc Asphalt requirement)

Photo Credit Bill Fitzgerald PE

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals SolutionYES Wrong

First issuehellipFront slope break should be 6 feet behind guardrail face at post 1 per the Standards (110 Min)

Second issuehellipMisc Asphalt should extend 10 feet upstream of post 1 per Standards

Answerhellip

Correctedhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Any issues hereYES Wrong

First issuehellipTrees are within the Approach Terminalrsquos clear area in the Standard Plans (where a clear 110 slope required)

Second issuehellipTree violates barrier setback per FDM Table 21542

Answerhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Any issues hereYES Wrong

First issuehellipTrees are within the Approach Terminalrsquos clear area in the Standard Plans (where a clear 110 slope required)

Second issuehellipTree violates barrier setback per FDM Table 21542

Answerhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach TerminalsYES Wrong

First issuehellipTrees are within the Approach Terminalrsquos clear area in the Standard Plans (where a clear 110 slope required)

From Standard Planshellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals

CREDIT VIRGINIA DOT ndash SKT Crash Test Published October 2016

httpswwwyoutubecomwatchv=OsKlfatcjogampfeature=youtube

httpswwwyoutubecomwatchv=h7tct7Oo9-8ampfeature=youtube

YES Wrong

First issuehellipTrees are within the Approach Terminalrsquos clear area in the Standard Plans (where a clear 110 slope required)

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals

CREDIT VIRGINIA DOT ndash SKT Crash Test Published October 2016

httpswwwyoutubecomwatchv=74ImLTY-PhUampfeature=youtube

YES Wrong

First issuehellipTrees are within the Approach Terminalrsquos clear area in the Standard Plans (where a clear 110 slope required)

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach TerminalsYES Wrong

First issuehellipTrees are within the Approach Terminalrsquos clear area in the Standard Plans (where a clear 110 slope required)

From Standard Planshellip

Guardrail Index 536-001

YES Wrong

Second issuehellipTree violates barrier setback per FDM Table 21542

Guardrail Index 536-001

YES Wrong

Second issuehellipTree violates barrier setback per FDM Table 21542

From FDMhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Any issue hereYES Wrong

First issuehellipPerpendicular guardrail is not proven crashworthybull No end treatmentsbull Violates ldquotaper raterdquo

requirements of SPI Part I (big time)

bull Requires shielding if within Clear Zone

Answerhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Any issue hereYES Wrong

Second issuehellipPerpendicular guardrail within the Approach Terminalrsquos clear area in the Standard Plans (where a clear 110 slope required)

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Any issue hereYES Wrong

Third issuehellipPerpendicular guardrail violates barrier setback per FDM Table 21542

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Solution 1

REMOVE theperpendicularGuardrail

Orhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Solution 2

1 Extend Guardrail to meet Length of Need per SPI Part B (Excel lsquoDesign Toolrsquo) which is Roadside Design Guide Eq 5-3

2 Meet minimum barrier setback per FDM Table 21542 (5 feet for general guardrail)

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Final Case StudyAssumptionsbull Design Speed

50 mph

bull Piers designed to withstand 600 kip impact load per FDM215454(Pier Protection Barrier notRequired)

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereAnswerhellip YES

First issuehellipPiers NOT shielded

ldquoLength of Needrdquo NOT met per SPI Part B (Excel Design Tool)

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereAnswerhellip YES

First issuehellipPiers NOT shielded

ldquoLength of Needrdquo NOT met per SPI Part B (Excel Design Tool)

Piers are behind the ldquogatingrdquo(break-away) portion of Approach Terminal

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereYES

Second issuehellipFlared Terminal usage on hold per RDB18-02

Regardlesshellip ldquoTaper Raterdquo too steep here at Approach Terminal (about 13 shown)

Guardrail requires 115 Max Taper Rate per SPI Part I

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereAnswerhellip YES

Third issuehellipldquoBarrier Setbackrdquo requirement likely not satisfied

per FDM Table 21542(5 feet or greater)hellip

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereYES

Fourth issuehellipldquoTrailing Anchoragerdquo not properly extended downstream of hazard

25-foot Requirement SPI C1 amp lsquoLONrsquo Design Tool (Excel)hellip

Answerhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereYES

Fourth issuehellipldquoTrailing Anchoragerdquo not properly extended downstream of hazard

25-foot Requirement SPI C1 amp lsquoLONrsquo Design Tool (Excel)hellip

AnswerhellipFrom lsquoLength of Needrsquo Excel Sheethellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Crash Cushion Index 544-001

Approach Terminals Solution 1lsquoCrash Cushionrsquobull ldquoSystem Widthrdquo ndash

lsquoWidersquo per SPI 544-001 Part C

bull ldquoLength Restrictionrdquo - per SPI 544-001 Part F

bull Contact Central Office for guidance

Note Define Crash Cushion with provided CADD cellhellipldquoSummary of Permanent Crash Cushions Tablerdquo

Guardrail Index 536-001 Crash Cushion Index 544-001

Approach Terminals Solution 1lsquoCrash Cushionrsquobull Guardrail ldquoreduced

post spacingrdquo to reduce required hazard setback per FDM Table 21542

bull Again contact Central Office for guidance for such limited space

Concrete Barrier Index 521-001 Crash Cushion 544-001

Approach Terminals Solution 2lsquoConcrete Barrierrsquo amp lsquoCrash Cushionrsquo

bull Requires project-specific design

bull Contact Central Office for guidance for such limited space

Questions

Richard Stepp PEStandard Plans Engineer

Central Office Roadway Design(850) 414-4313

richardsteppdotstateflus

Standard Plans Single-Slope Barriers

Page 20: Roadside Barriers - MASH Implementation Update & Design ... · Roadside Barriers - Lessons Learned 1. GUARDRAIL Standard Plans, Index 536-001 2. CONCRETE BARRIER Standard Plans, Index

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 13-15

Rigid Barrier Connection Any Issue HereAnswerhellip YES

asymp13 foot overlap with barrier is no longer Standard

(Overlap now only 7frac14rdquo Since FY2017-18 Standards for newsingle-faced guardrail)

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 13-15

Rigid Barrier Connection Any Issues HereYES

asymp13 foot overlap with barrier is no longer Standard

(Overlap now only 7frac14rdquo Since FY2017-18 Standards for newsingle-faced guardrail)

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 13-15

Rigid Barrier Connection Any Issues Here

Solution

YES

asymp13 foot overlap with barrier is no longer Standard

(Overlap now only 7frac14rdquo Since FY2017-18 Standards for newsingle-faced guardrail)

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8 13-14

Answerhellip

YES

Guardrail system ishellip

not long enough

Rigid Barrier Connection Any issue here

Minimum Length is Length of Approach Transition Connection lsquoLArsquoplus Length of End Treatment lsquoLErsquo

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8 13-14

Rigid Barrier End Shielding Min Length TL-2

lsquoLArsquo 213rsquo

+lsquoLErsquo 406rsquo

=

62rsquo

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8 13-14

Rigid Barrier End Shielding Min Length TL-2

lsquoLArsquo 213rsquo

+lsquoLErsquo 406rsquo

=

62rsquo

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8 13-14

Rigid Barrier End Shielding Min Length TL-3

lsquoLArsquo 306rsquo

+lsquoLErsquo 531rsquo

=

84rsquo

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8 13-14

Rigid Barrier End Shielding Min Length TL-3

lsquoLArsquo 306rsquo

+lsquoLErsquo 531rsquo

=

84rsquoNOTE If these lengths are not possible due to limited space consider the use of a Crash Cushion or a project-specific lsquovariationrsquo to fit the best barrier system possible

Contact Central Office for assistance

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Any issues hereAnswerhellip YES

1 Flared terminals not permitted per RDB18-02

2 Curbed conditions require parallel Approach Terminals per Standard Plans ampSPI Part C3 Approach Terminals require lsquoType Ersquo Curb

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals

From Standard Planshellip

Answerhellip YES

1 Flared terminals not permitted per RDB18-02

2 Curbed conditions require parallel Approach Terminals per Standard Plans ampSPI Part C3 Approach Terminals require lsquoType Ersquo Curb

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Solution

1 Flared terminals not permitted per RDB18-02

2 Curbed conditions require parallel Approach Terminals per Standard Plans

3 Approach Terminals require lsquoType Ersquo Curb

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Any issues hereYES Wrong

First issuehellipFront slope break should be 6 feet behind guardrail face at post 1 per the Standards (110 Max)

Second issuehellipMisc Asphalt should extend 10 feet upstream of post 1 per Standards

Answerhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach TerminalsYES Wrong

First issuehellipFront slope break should be 6 feet behind guardrail face at post 1 per the Standards (110 Min)

Second issuehellipMisc Asphalt should extend 10 feet upstream of post 1 per Standards

Answerhellip

From Standard Planshellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach TerminalsYES Wrong

First issuehellipFront slope break should be 6 feet behind guardrail face at post 1 per the Standards (110 Min)

Second issuehellipMisc Asphalt should extend 10 feet upstream of post 1 per Standards

Answerhellip

Example of Poor Slope Break Location (and steep slope not shielded)

Photo Credit Bill Fitzgerald PE

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach TerminalsYES Wrong

First issuehellipFront slope break should be 6 feet behind guardrail face at post 1 per the Standards (110 Min)

Second issuehellipMisc Asphalt should extend 10 feet upstream of post 1 per Standards

Answerhellip

Example of Poor Grading (The reason for Misc Asphalt requirement)

Photo Credit Bill Fitzgerald PE

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals SolutionYES Wrong

First issuehellipFront slope break should be 6 feet behind guardrail face at post 1 per the Standards (110 Min)

Second issuehellipMisc Asphalt should extend 10 feet upstream of post 1 per Standards

Answerhellip

Correctedhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Any issues hereYES Wrong

First issuehellipTrees are within the Approach Terminalrsquos clear area in the Standard Plans (where a clear 110 slope required)

Second issuehellipTree violates barrier setback per FDM Table 21542

Answerhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Any issues hereYES Wrong

First issuehellipTrees are within the Approach Terminalrsquos clear area in the Standard Plans (where a clear 110 slope required)

Second issuehellipTree violates barrier setback per FDM Table 21542

Answerhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach TerminalsYES Wrong

First issuehellipTrees are within the Approach Terminalrsquos clear area in the Standard Plans (where a clear 110 slope required)

From Standard Planshellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals

CREDIT VIRGINIA DOT ndash SKT Crash Test Published October 2016

httpswwwyoutubecomwatchv=OsKlfatcjogampfeature=youtube

httpswwwyoutubecomwatchv=h7tct7Oo9-8ampfeature=youtube

YES Wrong

First issuehellipTrees are within the Approach Terminalrsquos clear area in the Standard Plans (where a clear 110 slope required)

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals

CREDIT VIRGINIA DOT ndash SKT Crash Test Published October 2016

httpswwwyoutubecomwatchv=74ImLTY-PhUampfeature=youtube

YES Wrong

First issuehellipTrees are within the Approach Terminalrsquos clear area in the Standard Plans (where a clear 110 slope required)

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach TerminalsYES Wrong

First issuehellipTrees are within the Approach Terminalrsquos clear area in the Standard Plans (where a clear 110 slope required)

From Standard Planshellip

Guardrail Index 536-001

YES Wrong

Second issuehellipTree violates barrier setback per FDM Table 21542

Guardrail Index 536-001

YES Wrong

Second issuehellipTree violates barrier setback per FDM Table 21542

From FDMhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Any issue hereYES Wrong

First issuehellipPerpendicular guardrail is not proven crashworthybull No end treatmentsbull Violates ldquotaper raterdquo

requirements of SPI Part I (big time)

bull Requires shielding if within Clear Zone

Answerhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Any issue hereYES Wrong

Second issuehellipPerpendicular guardrail within the Approach Terminalrsquos clear area in the Standard Plans (where a clear 110 slope required)

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Any issue hereYES Wrong

Third issuehellipPerpendicular guardrail violates barrier setback per FDM Table 21542

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Solution 1

REMOVE theperpendicularGuardrail

Orhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Solution 2

1 Extend Guardrail to meet Length of Need per SPI Part B (Excel lsquoDesign Toolrsquo) which is Roadside Design Guide Eq 5-3

2 Meet minimum barrier setback per FDM Table 21542 (5 feet for general guardrail)

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Final Case StudyAssumptionsbull Design Speed

50 mph

bull Piers designed to withstand 600 kip impact load per FDM215454(Pier Protection Barrier notRequired)

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereAnswerhellip YES

First issuehellipPiers NOT shielded

ldquoLength of Needrdquo NOT met per SPI Part B (Excel Design Tool)

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereAnswerhellip YES

First issuehellipPiers NOT shielded

ldquoLength of Needrdquo NOT met per SPI Part B (Excel Design Tool)

Piers are behind the ldquogatingrdquo(break-away) portion of Approach Terminal

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereYES

Second issuehellipFlared Terminal usage on hold per RDB18-02

Regardlesshellip ldquoTaper Raterdquo too steep here at Approach Terminal (about 13 shown)

Guardrail requires 115 Max Taper Rate per SPI Part I

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereAnswerhellip YES

Third issuehellipldquoBarrier Setbackrdquo requirement likely not satisfied

per FDM Table 21542(5 feet or greater)hellip

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereYES

Fourth issuehellipldquoTrailing Anchoragerdquo not properly extended downstream of hazard

25-foot Requirement SPI C1 amp lsquoLONrsquo Design Tool (Excel)hellip

Answerhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereYES

Fourth issuehellipldquoTrailing Anchoragerdquo not properly extended downstream of hazard

25-foot Requirement SPI C1 amp lsquoLONrsquo Design Tool (Excel)hellip

AnswerhellipFrom lsquoLength of Needrsquo Excel Sheethellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Crash Cushion Index 544-001

Approach Terminals Solution 1lsquoCrash Cushionrsquobull ldquoSystem Widthrdquo ndash

lsquoWidersquo per SPI 544-001 Part C

bull ldquoLength Restrictionrdquo - per SPI 544-001 Part F

bull Contact Central Office for guidance

Note Define Crash Cushion with provided CADD cellhellipldquoSummary of Permanent Crash Cushions Tablerdquo

Guardrail Index 536-001 Crash Cushion Index 544-001

Approach Terminals Solution 1lsquoCrash Cushionrsquobull Guardrail ldquoreduced

post spacingrdquo to reduce required hazard setback per FDM Table 21542

bull Again contact Central Office for guidance for such limited space

Concrete Barrier Index 521-001 Crash Cushion 544-001

Approach Terminals Solution 2lsquoConcrete Barrierrsquo amp lsquoCrash Cushionrsquo

bull Requires project-specific design

bull Contact Central Office for guidance for such limited space

Questions

Richard Stepp PEStandard Plans Engineer

Central Office Roadway Design(850) 414-4313

richardsteppdotstateflus

Standard Plans Single-Slope Barriers

Page 21: Roadside Barriers - MASH Implementation Update & Design ... · Roadside Barriers - Lessons Learned 1. GUARDRAIL Standard Plans, Index 536-001 2. CONCRETE BARRIER Standard Plans, Index

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 13-15

Rigid Barrier Connection Any Issues HereYES

asymp13 foot overlap with barrier is no longer Standard

(Overlap now only 7frac14rdquo Since FY2017-18 Standards for newsingle-faced guardrail)

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 13-15

Rigid Barrier Connection Any Issues Here

Solution

YES

asymp13 foot overlap with barrier is no longer Standard

(Overlap now only 7frac14rdquo Since FY2017-18 Standards for newsingle-faced guardrail)

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8 13-14

Answerhellip

YES

Guardrail system ishellip

not long enough

Rigid Barrier Connection Any issue here

Minimum Length is Length of Approach Transition Connection lsquoLArsquoplus Length of End Treatment lsquoLErsquo

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8 13-14

Rigid Barrier End Shielding Min Length TL-2

lsquoLArsquo 213rsquo

+lsquoLErsquo 406rsquo

=

62rsquo

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8 13-14

Rigid Barrier End Shielding Min Length TL-2

lsquoLArsquo 213rsquo

+lsquoLErsquo 406rsquo

=

62rsquo

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8 13-14

Rigid Barrier End Shielding Min Length TL-3

lsquoLArsquo 306rsquo

+lsquoLErsquo 531rsquo

=

84rsquo

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8 13-14

Rigid Barrier End Shielding Min Length TL-3

lsquoLArsquo 306rsquo

+lsquoLErsquo 531rsquo

=

84rsquoNOTE If these lengths are not possible due to limited space consider the use of a Crash Cushion or a project-specific lsquovariationrsquo to fit the best barrier system possible

Contact Central Office for assistance

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Any issues hereAnswerhellip YES

1 Flared terminals not permitted per RDB18-02

2 Curbed conditions require parallel Approach Terminals per Standard Plans ampSPI Part C3 Approach Terminals require lsquoType Ersquo Curb

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals

From Standard Planshellip

Answerhellip YES

1 Flared terminals not permitted per RDB18-02

2 Curbed conditions require parallel Approach Terminals per Standard Plans ampSPI Part C3 Approach Terminals require lsquoType Ersquo Curb

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Solution

1 Flared terminals not permitted per RDB18-02

2 Curbed conditions require parallel Approach Terminals per Standard Plans

3 Approach Terminals require lsquoType Ersquo Curb

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Any issues hereYES Wrong

First issuehellipFront slope break should be 6 feet behind guardrail face at post 1 per the Standards (110 Max)

Second issuehellipMisc Asphalt should extend 10 feet upstream of post 1 per Standards

Answerhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach TerminalsYES Wrong

First issuehellipFront slope break should be 6 feet behind guardrail face at post 1 per the Standards (110 Min)

Second issuehellipMisc Asphalt should extend 10 feet upstream of post 1 per Standards

Answerhellip

From Standard Planshellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach TerminalsYES Wrong

First issuehellipFront slope break should be 6 feet behind guardrail face at post 1 per the Standards (110 Min)

Second issuehellipMisc Asphalt should extend 10 feet upstream of post 1 per Standards

Answerhellip

Example of Poor Slope Break Location (and steep slope not shielded)

Photo Credit Bill Fitzgerald PE

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach TerminalsYES Wrong

First issuehellipFront slope break should be 6 feet behind guardrail face at post 1 per the Standards (110 Min)

Second issuehellipMisc Asphalt should extend 10 feet upstream of post 1 per Standards

Answerhellip

Example of Poor Grading (The reason for Misc Asphalt requirement)

Photo Credit Bill Fitzgerald PE

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals SolutionYES Wrong

First issuehellipFront slope break should be 6 feet behind guardrail face at post 1 per the Standards (110 Min)

Second issuehellipMisc Asphalt should extend 10 feet upstream of post 1 per Standards

Answerhellip

Correctedhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Any issues hereYES Wrong

First issuehellipTrees are within the Approach Terminalrsquos clear area in the Standard Plans (where a clear 110 slope required)

Second issuehellipTree violates barrier setback per FDM Table 21542

Answerhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Any issues hereYES Wrong

First issuehellipTrees are within the Approach Terminalrsquos clear area in the Standard Plans (where a clear 110 slope required)

Second issuehellipTree violates barrier setback per FDM Table 21542

Answerhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach TerminalsYES Wrong

First issuehellipTrees are within the Approach Terminalrsquos clear area in the Standard Plans (where a clear 110 slope required)

From Standard Planshellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals

CREDIT VIRGINIA DOT ndash SKT Crash Test Published October 2016

httpswwwyoutubecomwatchv=OsKlfatcjogampfeature=youtube

httpswwwyoutubecomwatchv=h7tct7Oo9-8ampfeature=youtube

YES Wrong

First issuehellipTrees are within the Approach Terminalrsquos clear area in the Standard Plans (where a clear 110 slope required)

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals

CREDIT VIRGINIA DOT ndash SKT Crash Test Published October 2016

httpswwwyoutubecomwatchv=74ImLTY-PhUampfeature=youtube

YES Wrong

First issuehellipTrees are within the Approach Terminalrsquos clear area in the Standard Plans (where a clear 110 slope required)

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach TerminalsYES Wrong

First issuehellipTrees are within the Approach Terminalrsquos clear area in the Standard Plans (where a clear 110 slope required)

From Standard Planshellip

Guardrail Index 536-001

YES Wrong

Second issuehellipTree violates barrier setback per FDM Table 21542

Guardrail Index 536-001

YES Wrong

Second issuehellipTree violates barrier setback per FDM Table 21542

From FDMhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Any issue hereYES Wrong

First issuehellipPerpendicular guardrail is not proven crashworthybull No end treatmentsbull Violates ldquotaper raterdquo

requirements of SPI Part I (big time)

bull Requires shielding if within Clear Zone

Answerhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Any issue hereYES Wrong

Second issuehellipPerpendicular guardrail within the Approach Terminalrsquos clear area in the Standard Plans (where a clear 110 slope required)

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Any issue hereYES Wrong

Third issuehellipPerpendicular guardrail violates barrier setback per FDM Table 21542

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Solution 1

REMOVE theperpendicularGuardrail

Orhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Solution 2

1 Extend Guardrail to meet Length of Need per SPI Part B (Excel lsquoDesign Toolrsquo) which is Roadside Design Guide Eq 5-3

2 Meet minimum barrier setback per FDM Table 21542 (5 feet for general guardrail)

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Final Case StudyAssumptionsbull Design Speed

50 mph

bull Piers designed to withstand 600 kip impact load per FDM215454(Pier Protection Barrier notRequired)

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereAnswerhellip YES

First issuehellipPiers NOT shielded

ldquoLength of Needrdquo NOT met per SPI Part B (Excel Design Tool)

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereAnswerhellip YES

First issuehellipPiers NOT shielded

ldquoLength of Needrdquo NOT met per SPI Part B (Excel Design Tool)

Piers are behind the ldquogatingrdquo(break-away) portion of Approach Terminal

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereYES

Second issuehellipFlared Terminal usage on hold per RDB18-02

Regardlesshellip ldquoTaper Raterdquo too steep here at Approach Terminal (about 13 shown)

Guardrail requires 115 Max Taper Rate per SPI Part I

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereAnswerhellip YES

Third issuehellipldquoBarrier Setbackrdquo requirement likely not satisfied

per FDM Table 21542(5 feet or greater)hellip

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereYES

Fourth issuehellipldquoTrailing Anchoragerdquo not properly extended downstream of hazard

25-foot Requirement SPI C1 amp lsquoLONrsquo Design Tool (Excel)hellip

Answerhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereYES

Fourth issuehellipldquoTrailing Anchoragerdquo not properly extended downstream of hazard

25-foot Requirement SPI C1 amp lsquoLONrsquo Design Tool (Excel)hellip

AnswerhellipFrom lsquoLength of Needrsquo Excel Sheethellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Crash Cushion Index 544-001

Approach Terminals Solution 1lsquoCrash Cushionrsquobull ldquoSystem Widthrdquo ndash

lsquoWidersquo per SPI 544-001 Part C

bull ldquoLength Restrictionrdquo - per SPI 544-001 Part F

bull Contact Central Office for guidance

Note Define Crash Cushion with provided CADD cellhellipldquoSummary of Permanent Crash Cushions Tablerdquo

Guardrail Index 536-001 Crash Cushion Index 544-001

Approach Terminals Solution 1lsquoCrash Cushionrsquobull Guardrail ldquoreduced

post spacingrdquo to reduce required hazard setback per FDM Table 21542

bull Again contact Central Office for guidance for such limited space

Concrete Barrier Index 521-001 Crash Cushion 544-001

Approach Terminals Solution 2lsquoConcrete Barrierrsquo amp lsquoCrash Cushionrsquo

bull Requires project-specific design

bull Contact Central Office for guidance for such limited space

Questions

Richard Stepp PEStandard Plans Engineer

Central Office Roadway Design(850) 414-4313

richardsteppdotstateflus

Standard Plans Single-Slope Barriers

Page 22: Roadside Barriers - MASH Implementation Update & Design ... · Roadside Barriers - Lessons Learned 1. GUARDRAIL Standard Plans, Index 536-001 2. CONCRETE BARRIER Standard Plans, Index

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 13-15

Rigid Barrier Connection Any Issues Here

Solution

YES

asymp13 foot overlap with barrier is no longer Standard

(Overlap now only 7frac14rdquo Since FY2017-18 Standards for newsingle-faced guardrail)

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8 13-14

Answerhellip

YES

Guardrail system ishellip

not long enough

Rigid Barrier Connection Any issue here

Minimum Length is Length of Approach Transition Connection lsquoLArsquoplus Length of End Treatment lsquoLErsquo

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8 13-14

Rigid Barrier End Shielding Min Length TL-2

lsquoLArsquo 213rsquo

+lsquoLErsquo 406rsquo

=

62rsquo

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8 13-14

Rigid Barrier End Shielding Min Length TL-2

lsquoLArsquo 213rsquo

+lsquoLErsquo 406rsquo

=

62rsquo

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8 13-14

Rigid Barrier End Shielding Min Length TL-3

lsquoLArsquo 306rsquo

+lsquoLErsquo 531rsquo

=

84rsquo

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8 13-14

Rigid Barrier End Shielding Min Length TL-3

lsquoLArsquo 306rsquo

+lsquoLErsquo 531rsquo

=

84rsquoNOTE If these lengths are not possible due to limited space consider the use of a Crash Cushion or a project-specific lsquovariationrsquo to fit the best barrier system possible

Contact Central Office for assistance

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Any issues hereAnswerhellip YES

1 Flared terminals not permitted per RDB18-02

2 Curbed conditions require parallel Approach Terminals per Standard Plans ampSPI Part C3 Approach Terminals require lsquoType Ersquo Curb

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals

From Standard Planshellip

Answerhellip YES

1 Flared terminals not permitted per RDB18-02

2 Curbed conditions require parallel Approach Terminals per Standard Plans ampSPI Part C3 Approach Terminals require lsquoType Ersquo Curb

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Solution

1 Flared terminals not permitted per RDB18-02

2 Curbed conditions require parallel Approach Terminals per Standard Plans

3 Approach Terminals require lsquoType Ersquo Curb

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Any issues hereYES Wrong

First issuehellipFront slope break should be 6 feet behind guardrail face at post 1 per the Standards (110 Max)

Second issuehellipMisc Asphalt should extend 10 feet upstream of post 1 per Standards

Answerhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach TerminalsYES Wrong

First issuehellipFront slope break should be 6 feet behind guardrail face at post 1 per the Standards (110 Min)

Second issuehellipMisc Asphalt should extend 10 feet upstream of post 1 per Standards

Answerhellip

From Standard Planshellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach TerminalsYES Wrong

First issuehellipFront slope break should be 6 feet behind guardrail face at post 1 per the Standards (110 Min)

Second issuehellipMisc Asphalt should extend 10 feet upstream of post 1 per Standards

Answerhellip

Example of Poor Slope Break Location (and steep slope not shielded)

Photo Credit Bill Fitzgerald PE

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach TerminalsYES Wrong

First issuehellipFront slope break should be 6 feet behind guardrail face at post 1 per the Standards (110 Min)

Second issuehellipMisc Asphalt should extend 10 feet upstream of post 1 per Standards

Answerhellip

Example of Poor Grading (The reason for Misc Asphalt requirement)

Photo Credit Bill Fitzgerald PE

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals SolutionYES Wrong

First issuehellipFront slope break should be 6 feet behind guardrail face at post 1 per the Standards (110 Min)

Second issuehellipMisc Asphalt should extend 10 feet upstream of post 1 per Standards

Answerhellip

Correctedhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Any issues hereYES Wrong

First issuehellipTrees are within the Approach Terminalrsquos clear area in the Standard Plans (where a clear 110 slope required)

Second issuehellipTree violates barrier setback per FDM Table 21542

Answerhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Any issues hereYES Wrong

First issuehellipTrees are within the Approach Terminalrsquos clear area in the Standard Plans (where a clear 110 slope required)

Second issuehellipTree violates barrier setback per FDM Table 21542

Answerhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach TerminalsYES Wrong

First issuehellipTrees are within the Approach Terminalrsquos clear area in the Standard Plans (where a clear 110 slope required)

From Standard Planshellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals

CREDIT VIRGINIA DOT ndash SKT Crash Test Published October 2016

httpswwwyoutubecomwatchv=OsKlfatcjogampfeature=youtube

httpswwwyoutubecomwatchv=h7tct7Oo9-8ampfeature=youtube

YES Wrong

First issuehellipTrees are within the Approach Terminalrsquos clear area in the Standard Plans (where a clear 110 slope required)

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals

CREDIT VIRGINIA DOT ndash SKT Crash Test Published October 2016

httpswwwyoutubecomwatchv=74ImLTY-PhUampfeature=youtube

YES Wrong

First issuehellipTrees are within the Approach Terminalrsquos clear area in the Standard Plans (where a clear 110 slope required)

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach TerminalsYES Wrong

First issuehellipTrees are within the Approach Terminalrsquos clear area in the Standard Plans (where a clear 110 slope required)

From Standard Planshellip

Guardrail Index 536-001

YES Wrong

Second issuehellipTree violates barrier setback per FDM Table 21542

Guardrail Index 536-001

YES Wrong

Second issuehellipTree violates barrier setback per FDM Table 21542

From FDMhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Any issue hereYES Wrong

First issuehellipPerpendicular guardrail is not proven crashworthybull No end treatmentsbull Violates ldquotaper raterdquo

requirements of SPI Part I (big time)

bull Requires shielding if within Clear Zone

Answerhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Any issue hereYES Wrong

Second issuehellipPerpendicular guardrail within the Approach Terminalrsquos clear area in the Standard Plans (where a clear 110 slope required)

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Any issue hereYES Wrong

Third issuehellipPerpendicular guardrail violates barrier setback per FDM Table 21542

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Solution 1

REMOVE theperpendicularGuardrail

Orhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Solution 2

1 Extend Guardrail to meet Length of Need per SPI Part B (Excel lsquoDesign Toolrsquo) which is Roadside Design Guide Eq 5-3

2 Meet minimum barrier setback per FDM Table 21542 (5 feet for general guardrail)

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Final Case StudyAssumptionsbull Design Speed

50 mph

bull Piers designed to withstand 600 kip impact load per FDM215454(Pier Protection Barrier notRequired)

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereAnswerhellip YES

First issuehellipPiers NOT shielded

ldquoLength of Needrdquo NOT met per SPI Part B (Excel Design Tool)

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereAnswerhellip YES

First issuehellipPiers NOT shielded

ldquoLength of Needrdquo NOT met per SPI Part B (Excel Design Tool)

Piers are behind the ldquogatingrdquo(break-away) portion of Approach Terminal

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereYES

Second issuehellipFlared Terminal usage on hold per RDB18-02

Regardlesshellip ldquoTaper Raterdquo too steep here at Approach Terminal (about 13 shown)

Guardrail requires 115 Max Taper Rate per SPI Part I

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereAnswerhellip YES

Third issuehellipldquoBarrier Setbackrdquo requirement likely not satisfied

per FDM Table 21542(5 feet or greater)hellip

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereYES

Fourth issuehellipldquoTrailing Anchoragerdquo not properly extended downstream of hazard

25-foot Requirement SPI C1 amp lsquoLONrsquo Design Tool (Excel)hellip

Answerhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereYES

Fourth issuehellipldquoTrailing Anchoragerdquo not properly extended downstream of hazard

25-foot Requirement SPI C1 amp lsquoLONrsquo Design Tool (Excel)hellip

AnswerhellipFrom lsquoLength of Needrsquo Excel Sheethellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Crash Cushion Index 544-001

Approach Terminals Solution 1lsquoCrash Cushionrsquobull ldquoSystem Widthrdquo ndash

lsquoWidersquo per SPI 544-001 Part C

bull ldquoLength Restrictionrdquo - per SPI 544-001 Part F

bull Contact Central Office for guidance

Note Define Crash Cushion with provided CADD cellhellipldquoSummary of Permanent Crash Cushions Tablerdquo

Guardrail Index 536-001 Crash Cushion Index 544-001

Approach Terminals Solution 1lsquoCrash Cushionrsquobull Guardrail ldquoreduced

post spacingrdquo to reduce required hazard setback per FDM Table 21542

bull Again contact Central Office for guidance for such limited space

Concrete Barrier Index 521-001 Crash Cushion 544-001

Approach Terminals Solution 2lsquoConcrete Barrierrsquo amp lsquoCrash Cushionrsquo

bull Requires project-specific design

bull Contact Central Office for guidance for such limited space

Questions

Richard Stepp PEStandard Plans Engineer

Central Office Roadway Design(850) 414-4313

richardsteppdotstateflus

Standard Plans Single-Slope Barriers

Page 23: Roadside Barriers - MASH Implementation Update & Design ... · Roadside Barriers - Lessons Learned 1. GUARDRAIL Standard Plans, Index 536-001 2. CONCRETE BARRIER Standard Plans, Index

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8 13-14

Answerhellip

YES

Guardrail system ishellip

not long enough

Rigid Barrier Connection Any issue here

Minimum Length is Length of Approach Transition Connection lsquoLArsquoplus Length of End Treatment lsquoLErsquo

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8 13-14

Rigid Barrier End Shielding Min Length TL-2

lsquoLArsquo 213rsquo

+lsquoLErsquo 406rsquo

=

62rsquo

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8 13-14

Rigid Barrier End Shielding Min Length TL-2

lsquoLArsquo 213rsquo

+lsquoLErsquo 406rsquo

=

62rsquo

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8 13-14

Rigid Barrier End Shielding Min Length TL-3

lsquoLArsquo 306rsquo

+lsquoLErsquo 531rsquo

=

84rsquo

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8 13-14

Rigid Barrier End Shielding Min Length TL-3

lsquoLArsquo 306rsquo

+lsquoLErsquo 531rsquo

=

84rsquoNOTE If these lengths are not possible due to limited space consider the use of a Crash Cushion or a project-specific lsquovariationrsquo to fit the best barrier system possible

Contact Central Office for assistance

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Any issues hereAnswerhellip YES

1 Flared terminals not permitted per RDB18-02

2 Curbed conditions require parallel Approach Terminals per Standard Plans ampSPI Part C3 Approach Terminals require lsquoType Ersquo Curb

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals

From Standard Planshellip

Answerhellip YES

1 Flared terminals not permitted per RDB18-02

2 Curbed conditions require parallel Approach Terminals per Standard Plans ampSPI Part C3 Approach Terminals require lsquoType Ersquo Curb

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Solution

1 Flared terminals not permitted per RDB18-02

2 Curbed conditions require parallel Approach Terminals per Standard Plans

3 Approach Terminals require lsquoType Ersquo Curb

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Any issues hereYES Wrong

First issuehellipFront slope break should be 6 feet behind guardrail face at post 1 per the Standards (110 Max)

Second issuehellipMisc Asphalt should extend 10 feet upstream of post 1 per Standards

Answerhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach TerminalsYES Wrong

First issuehellipFront slope break should be 6 feet behind guardrail face at post 1 per the Standards (110 Min)

Second issuehellipMisc Asphalt should extend 10 feet upstream of post 1 per Standards

Answerhellip

From Standard Planshellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach TerminalsYES Wrong

First issuehellipFront slope break should be 6 feet behind guardrail face at post 1 per the Standards (110 Min)

Second issuehellipMisc Asphalt should extend 10 feet upstream of post 1 per Standards

Answerhellip

Example of Poor Slope Break Location (and steep slope not shielded)

Photo Credit Bill Fitzgerald PE

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach TerminalsYES Wrong

First issuehellipFront slope break should be 6 feet behind guardrail face at post 1 per the Standards (110 Min)

Second issuehellipMisc Asphalt should extend 10 feet upstream of post 1 per Standards

Answerhellip

Example of Poor Grading (The reason for Misc Asphalt requirement)

Photo Credit Bill Fitzgerald PE

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals SolutionYES Wrong

First issuehellipFront slope break should be 6 feet behind guardrail face at post 1 per the Standards (110 Min)

Second issuehellipMisc Asphalt should extend 10 feet upstream of post 1 per Standards

Answerhellip

Correctedhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Any issues hereYES Wrong

First issuehellipTrees are within the Approach Terminalrsquos clear area in the Standard Plans (where a clear 110 slope required)

Second issuehellipTree violates barrier setback per FDM Table 21542

Answerhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Any issues hereYES Wrong

First issuehellipTrees are within the Approach Terminalrsquos clear area in the Standard Plans (where a clear 110 slope required)

Second issuehellipTree violates barrier setback per FDM Table 21542

Answerhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach TerminalsYES Wrong

First issuehellipTrees are within the Approach Terminalrsquos clear area in the Standard Plans (where a clear 110 slope required)

From Standard Planshellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals

CREDIT VIRGINIA DOT ndash SKT Crash Test Published October 2016

httpswwwyoutubecomwatchv=OsKlfatcjogampfeature=youtube

httpswwwyoutubecomwatchv=h7tct7Oo9-8ampfeature=youtube

YES Wrong

First issuehellipTrees are within the Approach Terminalrsquos clear area in the Standard Plans (where a clear 110 slope required)

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals

CREDIT VIRGINIA DOT ndash SKT Crash Test Published October 2016

httpswwwyoutubecomwatchv=74ImLTY-PhUampfeature=youtube

YES Wrong

First issuehellipTrees are within the Approach Terminalrsquos clear area in the Standard Plans (where a clear 110 slope required)

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach TerminalsYES Wrong

First issuehellipTrees are within the Approach Terminalrsquos clear area in the Standard Plans (where a clear 110 slope required)

From Standard Planshellip

Guardrail Index 536-001

YES Wrong

Second issuehellipTree violates barrier setback per FDM Table 21542

Guardrail Index 536-001

YES Wrong

Second issuehellipTree violates barrier setback per FDM Table 21542

From FDMhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Any issue hereYES Wrong

First issuehellipPerpendicular guardrail is not proven crashworthybull No end treatmentsbull Violates ldquotaper raterdquo

requirements of SPI Part I (big time)

bull Requires shielding if within Clear Zone

Answerhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Any issue hereYES Wrong

Second issuehellipPerpendicular guardrail within the Approach Terminalrsquos clear area in the Standard Plans (where a clear 110 slope required)

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Any issue hereYES Wrong

Third issuehellipPerpendicular guardrail violates barrier setback per FDM Table 21542

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Solution 1

REMOVE theperpendicularGuardrail

Orhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Solution 2

1 Extend Guardrail to meet Length of Need per SPI Part B (Excel lsquoDesign Toolrsquo) which is Roadside Design Guide Eq 5-3

2 Meet minimum barrier setback per FDM Table 21542 (5 feet for general guardrail)

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Final Case StudyAssumptionsbull Design Speed

50 mph

bull Piers designed to withstand 600 kip impact load per FDM215454(Pier Protection Barrier notRequired)

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereAnswerhellip YES

First issuehellipPiers NOT shielded

ldquoLength of Needrdquo NOT met per SPI Part B (Excel Design Tool)

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereAnswerhellip YES

First issuehellipPiers NOT shielded

ldquoLength of Needrdquo NOT met per SPI Part B (Excel Design Tool)

Piers are behind the ldquogatingrdquo(break-away) portion of Approach Terminal

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereYES

Second issuehellipFlared Terminal usage on hold per RDB18-02

Regardlesshellip ldquoTaper Raterdquo too steep here at Approach Terminal (about 13 shown)

Guardrail requires 115 Max Taper Rate per SPI Part I

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereAnswerhellip YES

Third issuehellipldquoBarrier Setbackrdquo requirement likely not satisfied

per FDM Table 21542(5 feet or greater)hellip

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereYES

Fourth issuehellipldquoTrailing Anchoragerdquo not properly extended downstream of hazard

25-foot Requirement SPI C1 amp lsquoLONrsquo Design Tool (Excel)hellip

Answerhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereYES

Fourth issuehellipldquoTrailing Anchoragerdquo not properly extended downstream of hazard

25-foot Requirement SPI C1 amp lsquoLONrsquo Design Tool (Excel)hellip

AnswerhellipFrom lsquoLength of Needrsquo Excel Sheethellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Crash Cushion Index 544-001

Approach Terminals Solution 1lsquoCrash Cushionrsquobull ldquoSystem Widthrdquo ndash

lsquoWidersquo per SPI 544-001 Part C

bull ldquoLength Restrictionrdquo - per SPI 544-001 Part F

bull Contact Central Office for guidance

Note Define Crash Cushion with provided CADD cellhellipldquoSummary of Permanent Crash Cushions Tablerdquo

Guardrail Index 536-001 Crash Cushion Index 544-001

Approach Terminals Solution 1lsquoCrash Cushionrsquobull Guardrail ldquoreduced

post spacingrdquo to reduce required hazard setback per FDM Table 21542

bull Again contact Central Office for guidance for such limited space

Concrete Barrier Index 521-001 Crash Cushion 544-001

Approach Terminals Solution 2lsquoConcrete Barrierrsquo amp lsquoCrash Cushionrsquo

bull Requires project-specific design

bull Contact Central Office for guidance for such limited space

Questions

Richard Stepp PEStandard Plans Engineer

Central Office Roadway Design(850) 414-4313

richardsteppdotstateflus

Standard Plans Single-Slope Barriers

Page 24: Roadside Barriers - MASH Implementation Update & Design ... · Roadside Barriers - Lessons Learned 1. GUARDRAIL Standard Plans, Index 536-001 2. CONCRETE BARRIER Standard Plans, Index

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8 13-14

Rigid Barrier End Shielding Min Length TL-2

lsquoLArsquo 213rsquo

+lsquoLErsquo 406rsquo

=

62rsquo

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8 13-14

Rigid Barrier End Shielding Min Length TL-2

lsquoLArsquo 213rsquo

+lsquoLErsquo 406rsquo

=

62rsquo

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8 13-14

Rigid Barrier End Shielding Min Length TL-3

lsquoLArsquo 306rsquo

+lsquoLErsquo 531rsquo

=

84rsquo

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8 13-14

Rigid Barrier End Shielding Min Length TL-3

lsquoLArsquo 306rsquo

+lsquoLErsquo 531rsquo

=

84rsquoNOTE If these lengths are not possible due to limited space consider the use of a Crash Cushion or a project-specific lsquovariationrsquo to fit the best barrier system possible

Contact Central Office for assistance

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Any issues hereAnswerhellip YES

1 Flared terminals not permitted per RDB18-02

2 Curbed conditions require parallel Approach Terminals per Standard Plans ampSPI Part C3 Approach Terminals require lsquoType Ersquo Curb

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals

From Standard Planshellip

Answerhellip YES

1 Flared terminals not permitted per RDB18-02

2 Curbed conditions require parallel Approach Terminals per Standard Plans ampSPI Part C3 Approach Terminals require lsquoType Ersquo Curb

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Solution

1 Flared terminals not permitted per RDB18-02

2 Curbed conditions require parallel Approach Terminals per Standard Plans

3 Approach Terminals require lsquoType Ersquo Curb

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Any issues hereYES Wrong

First issuehellipFront slope break should be 6 feet behind guardrail face at post 1 per the Standards (110 Max)

Second issuehellipMisc Asphalt should extend 10 feet upstream of post 1 per Standards

Answerhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach TerminalsYES Wrong

First issuehellipFront slope break should be 6 feet behind guardrail face at post 1 per the Standards (110 Min)

Second issuehellipMisc Asphalt should extend 10 feet upstream of post 1 per Standards

Answerhellip

From Standard Planshellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach TerminalsYES Wrong

First issuehellipFront slope break should be 6 feet behind guardrail face at post 1 per the Standards (110 Min)

Second issuehellipMisc Asphalt should extend 10 feet upstream of post 1 per Standards

Answerhellip

Example of Poor Slope Break Location (and steep slope not shielded)

Photo Credit Bill Fitzgerald PE

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach TerminalsYES Wrong

First issuehellipFront slope break should be 6 feet behind guardrail face at post 1 per the Standards (110 Min)

Second issuehellipMisc Asphalt should extend 10 feet upstream of post 1 per Standards

Answerhellip

Example of Poor Grading (The reason for Misc Asphalt requirement)

Photo Credit Bill Fitzgerald PE

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals SolutionYES Wrong

First issuehellipFront slope break should be 6 feet behind guardrail face at post 1 per the Standards (110 Min)

Second issuehellipMisc Asphalt should extend 10 feet upstream of post 1 per Standards

Answerhellip

Correctedhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Any issues hereYES Wrong

First issuehellipTrees are within the Approach Terminalrsquos clear area in the Standard Plans (where a clear 110 slope required)

Second issuehellipTree violates barrier setback per FDM Table 21542

Answerhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Any issues hereYES Wrong

First issuehellipTrees are within the Approach Terminalrsquos clear area in the Standard Plans (where a clear 110 slope required)

Second issuehellipTree violates barrier setback per FDM Table 21542

Answerhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach TerminalsYES Wrong

First issuehellipTrees are within the Approach Terminalrsquos clear area in the Standard Plans (where a clear 110 slope required)

From Standard Planshellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals

CREDIT VIRGINIA DOT ndash SKT Crash Test Published October 2016

httpswwwyoutubecomwatchv=OsKlfatcjogampfeature=youtube

httpswwwyoutubecomwatchv=h7tct7Oo9-8ampfeature=youtube

YES Wrong

First issuehellipTrees are within the Approach Terminalrsquos clear area in the Standard Plans (where a clear 110 slope required)

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals

CREDIT VIRGINIA DOT ndash SKT Crash Test Published October 2016

httpswwwyoutubecomwatchv=74ImLTY-PhUampfeature=youtube

YES Wrong

First issuehellipTrees are within the Approach Terminalrsquos clear area in the Standard Plans (where a clear 110 slope required)

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach TerminalsYES Wrong

First issuehellipTrees are within the Approach Terminalrsquos clear area in the Standard Plans (where a clear 110 slope required)

From Standard Planshellip

Guardrail Index 536-001

YES Wrong

Second issuehellipTree violates barrier setback per FDM Table 21542

Guardrail Index 536-001

YES Wrong

Second issuehellipTree violates barrier setback per FDM Table 21542

From FDMhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Any issue hereYES Wrong

First issuehellipPerpendicular guardrail is not proven crashworthybull No end treatmentsbull Violates ldquotaper raterdquo

requirements of SPI Part I (big time)

bull Requires shielding if within Clear Zone

Answerhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Any issue hereYES Wrong

Second issuehellipPerpendicular guardrail within the Approach Terminalrsquos clear area in the Standard Plans (where a clear 110 slope required)

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Any issue hereYES Wrong

Third issuehellipPerpendicular guardrail violates barrier setback per FDM Table 21542

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Solution 1

REMOVE theperpendicularGuardrail

Orhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Solution 2

1 Extend Guardrail to meet Length of Need per SPI Part B (Excel lsquoDesign Toolrsquo) which is Roadside Design Guide Eq 5-3

2 Meet minimum barrier setback per FDM Table 21542 (5 feet for general guardrail)

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Final Case StudyAssumptionsbull Design Speed

50 mph

bull Piers designed to withstand 600 kip impact load per FDM215454(Pier Protection Barrier notRequired)

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereAnswerhellip YES

First issuehellipPiers NOT shielded

ldquoLength of Needrdquo NOT met per SPI Part B (Excel Design Tool)

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereAnswerhellip YES

First issuehellipPiers NOT shielded

ldquoLength of Needrdquo NOT met per SPI Part B (Excel Design Tool)

Piers are behind the ldquogatingrdquo(break-away) portion of Approach Terminal

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereYES

Second issuehellipFlared Terminal usage on hold per RDB18-02

Regardlesshellip ldquoTaper Raterdquo too steep here at Approach Terminal (about 13 shown)

Guardrail requires 115 Max Taper Rate per SPI Part I

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereAnswerhellip YES

Third issuehellipldquoBarrier Setbackrdquo requirement likely not satisfied

per FDM Table 21542(5 feet or greater)hellip

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereYES

Fourth issuehellipldquoTrailing Anchoragerdquo not properly extended downstream of hazard

25-foot Requirement SPI C1 amp lsquoLONrsquo Design Tool (Excel)hellip

Answerhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereYES

Fourth issuehellipldquoTrailing Anchoragerdquo not properly extended downstream of hazard

25-foot Requirement SPI C1 amp lsquoLONrsquo Design Tool (Excel)hellip

AnswerhellipFrom lsquoLength of Needrsquo Excel Sheethellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Crash Cushion Index 544-001

Approach Terminals Solution 1lsquoCrash Cushionrsquobull ldquoSystem Widthrdquo ndash

lsquoWidersquo per SPI 544-001 Part C

bull ldquoLength Restrictionrdquo - per SPI 544-001 Part F

bull Contact Central Office for guidance

Note Define Crash Cushion with provided CADD cellhellipldquoSummary of Permanent Crash Cushions Tablerdquo

Guardrail Index 536-001 Crash Cushion Index 544-001

Approach Terminals Solution 1lsquoCrash Cushionrsquobull Guardrail ldquoreduced

post spacingrdquo to reduce required hazard setback per FDM Table 21542

bull Again contact Central Office for guidance for such limited space

Concrete Barrier Index 521-001 Crash Cushion 544-001

Approach Terminals Solution 2lsquoConcrete Barrierrsquo amp lsquoCrash Cushionrsquo

bull Requires project-specific design

bull Contact Central Office for guidance for such limited space

Questions

Richard Stepp PEStandard Plans Engineer

Central Office Roadway Design(850) 414-4313

richardsteppdotstateflus

Standard Plans Single-Slope Barriers

Page 25: Roadside Barriers - MASH Implementation Update & Design ... · Roadside Barriers - Lessons Learned 1. GUARDRAIL Standard Plans, Index 536-001 2. CONCRETE BARRIER Standard Plans, Index

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8 13-14

Rigid Barrier End Shielding Min Length TL-2

lsquoLArsquo 213rsquo

+lsquoLErsquo 406rsquo

=

62rsquo

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8 13-14

Rigid Barrier End Shielding Min Length TL-3

lsquoLArsquo 306rsquo

+lsquoLErsquo 531rsquo

=

84rsquo

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8 13-14

Rigid Barrier End Shielding Min Length TL-3

lsquoLArsquo 306rsquo

+lsquoLErsquo 531rsquo

=

84rsquoNOTE If these lengths are not possible due to limited space consider the use of a Crash Cushion or a project-specific lsquovariationrsquo to fit the best barrier system possible

Contact Central Office for assistance

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Any issues hereAnswerhellip YES

1 Flared terminals not permitted per RDB18-02

2 Curbed conditions require parallel Approach Terminals per Standard Plans ampSPI Part C3 Approach Terminals require lsquoType Ersquo Curb

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals

From Standard Planshellip

Answerhellip YES

1 Flared terminals not permitted per RDB18-02

2 Curbed conditions require parallel Approach Terminals per Standard Plans ampSPI Part C3 Approach Terminals require lsquoType Ersquo Curb

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Solution

1 Flared terminals not permitted per RDB18-02

2 Curbed conditions require parallel Approach Terminals per Standard Plans

3 Approach Terminals require lsquoType Ersquo Curb

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Any issues hereYES Wrong

First issuehellipFront slope break should be 6 feet behind guardrail face at post 1 per the Standards (110 Max)

Second issuehellipMisc Asphalt should extend 10 feet upstream of post 1 per Standards

Answerhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach TerminalsYES Wrong

First issuehellipFront slope break should be 6 feet behind guardrail face at post 1 per the Standards (110 Min)

Second issuehellipMisc Asphalt should extend 10 feet upstream of post 1 per Standards

Answerhellip

From Standard Planshellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach TerminalsYES Wrong

First issuehellipFront slope break should be 6 feet behind guardrail face at post 1 per the Standards (110 Min)

Second issuehellipMisc Asphalt should extend 10 feet upstream of post 1 per Standards

Answerhellip

Example of Poor Slope Break Location (and steep slope not shielded)

Photo Credit Bill Fitzgerald PE

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach TerminalsYES Wrong

First issuehellipFront slope break should be 6 feet behind guardrail face at post 1 per the Standards (110 Min)

Second issuehellipMisc Asphalt should extend 10 feet upstream of post 1 per Standards

Answerhellip

Example of Poor Grading (The reason for Misc Asphalt requirement)

Photo Credit Bill Fitzgerald PE

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals SolutionYES Wrong

First issuehellipFront slope break should be 6 feet behind guardrail face at post 1 per the Standards (110 Min)

Second issuehellipMisc Asphalt should extend 10 feet upstream of post 1 per Standards

Answerhellip

Correctedhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Any issues hereYES Wrong

First issuehellipTrees are within the Approach Terminalrsquos clear area in the Standard Plans (where a clear 110 slope required)

Second issuehellipTree violates barrier setback per FDM Table 21542

Answerhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Any issues hereYES Wrong

First issuehellipTrees are within the Approach Terminalrsquos clear area in the Standard Plans (where a clear 110 slope required)

Second issuehellipTree violates barrier setback per FDM Table 21542

Answerhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach TerminalsYES Wrong

First issuehellipTrees are within the Approach Terminalrsquos clear area in the Standard Plans (where a clear 110 slope required)

From Standard Planshellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals

CREDIT VIRGINIA DOT ndash SKT Crash Test Published October 2016

httpswwwyoutubecomwatchv=OsKlfatcjogampfeature=youtube

httpswwwyoutubecomwatchv=h7tct7Oo9-8ampfeature=youtube

YES Wrong

First issuehellipTrees are within the Approach Terminalrsquos clear area in the Standard Plans (where a clear 110 slope required)

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals

CREDIT VIRGINIA DOT ndash SKT Crash Test Published October 2016

httpswwwyoutubecomwatchv=74ImLTY-PhUampfeature=youtube

YES Wrong

First issuehellipTrees are within the Approach Terminalrsquos clear area in the Standard Plans (where a clear 110 slope required)

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach TerminalsYES Wrong

First issuehellipTrees are within the Approach Terminalrsquos clear area in the Standard Plans (where a clear 110 slope required)

From Standard Planshellip

Guardrail Index 536-001

YES Wrong

Second issuehellipTree violates barrier setback per FDM Table 21542

Guardrail Index 536-001

YES Wrong

Second issuehellipTree violates barrier setback per FDM Table 21542

From FDMhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Any issue hereYES Wrong

First issuehellipPerpendicular guardrail is not proven crashworthybull No end treatmentsbull Violates ldquotaper raterdquo

requirements of SPI Part I (big time)

bull Requires shielding if within Clear Zone

Answerhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Any issue hereYES Wrong

Second issuehellipPerpendicular guardrail within the Approach Terminalrsquos clear area in the Standard Plans (where a clear 110 slope required)

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Any issue hereYES Wrong

Third issuehellipPerpendicular guardrail violates barrier setback per FDM Table 21542

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Solution 1

REMOVE theperpendicularGuardrail

Orhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Solution 2

1 Extend Guardrail to meet Length of Need per SPI Part B (Excel lsquoDesign Toolrsquo) which is Roadside Design Guide Eq 5-3

2 Meet minimum barrier setback per FDM Table 21542 (5 feet for general guardrail)

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Final Case StudyAssumptionsbull Design Speed

50 mph

bull Piers designed to withstand 600 kip impact load per FDM215454(Pier Protection Barrier notRequired)

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereAnswerhellip YES

First issuehellipPiers NOT shielded

ldquoLength of Needrdquo NOT met per SPI Part B (Excel Design Tool)

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereAnswerhellip YES

First issuehellipPiers NOT shielded

ldquoLength of Needrdquo NOT met per SPI Part B (Excel Design Tool)

Piers are behind the ldquogatingrdquo(break-away) portion of Approach Terminal

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereYES

Second issuehellipFlared Terminal usage on hold per RDB18-02

Regardlesshellip ldquoTaper Raterdquo too steep here at Approach Terminal (about 13 shown)

Guardrail requires 115 Max Taper Rate per SPI Part I

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereAnswerhellip YES

Third issuehellipldquoBarrier Setbackrdquo requirement likely not satisfied

per FDM Table 21542(5 feet or greater)hellip

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereYES

Fourth issuehellipldquoTrailing Anchoragerdquo not properly extended downstream of hazard

25-foot Requirement SPI C1 amp lsquoLONrsquo Design Tool (Excel)hellip

Answerhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereYES

Fourth issuehellipldquoTrailing Anchoragerdquo not properly extended downstream of hazard

25-foot Requirement SPI C1 amp lsquoLONrsquo Design Tool (Excel)hellip

AnswerhellipFrom lsquoLength of Needrsquo Excel Sheethellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Crash Cushion Index 544-001

Approach Terminals Solution 1lsquoCrash Cushionrsquobull ldquoSystem Widthrdquo ndash

lsquoWidersquo per SPI 544-001 Part C

bull ldquoLength Restrictionrdquo - per SPI 544-001 Part F

bull Contact Central Office for guidance

Note Define Crash Cushion with provided CADD cellhellipldquoSummary of Permanent Crash Cushions Tablerdquo

Guardrail Index 536-001 Crash Cushion Index 544-001

Approach Terminals Solution 1lsquoCrash Cushionrsquobull Guardrail ldquoreduced

post spacingrdquo to reduce required hazard setback per FDM Table 21542

bull Again contact Central Office for guidance for such limited space

Concrete Barrier Index 521-001 Crash Cushion 544-001

Approach Terminals Solution 2lsquoConcrete Barrierrsquo amp lsquoCrash Cushionrsquo

bull Requires project-specific design

bull Contact Central Office for guidance for such limited space

Questions

Richard Stepp PEStandard Plans Engineer

Central Office Roadway Design(850) 414-4313

richardsteppdotstateflus

Standard Plans Single-Slope Barriers

Page 26: Roadside Barriers - MASH Implementation Update & Design ... · Roadside Barriers - Lessons Learned 1. GUARDRAIL Standard Plans, Index 536-001 2. CONCRETE BARRIER Standard Plans, Index

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8 13-14

Rigid Barrier End Shielding Min Length TL-3

lsquoLArsquo 306rsquo

+lsquoLErsquo 531rsquo

=

84rsquo

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8 13-14

Rigid Barrier End Shielding Min Length TL-3

lsquoLArsquo 306rsquo

+lsquoLErsquo 531rsquo

=

84rsquoNOTE If these lengths are not possible due to limited space consider the use of a Crash Cushion or a project-specific lsquovariationrsquo to fit the best barrier system possible

Contact Central Office for assistance

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Any issues hereAnswerhellip YES

1 Flared terminals not permitted per RDB18-02

2 Curbed conditions require parallel Approach Terminals per Standard Plans ampSPI Part C3 Approach Terminals require lsquoType Ersquo Curb

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals

From Standard Planshellip

Answerhellip YES

1 Flared terminals not permitted per RDB18-02

2 Curbed conditions require parallel Approach Terminals per Standard Plans ampSPI Part C3 Approach Terminals require lsquoType Ersquo Curb

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Solution

1 Flared terminals not permitted per RDB18-02

2 Curbed conditions require parallel Approach Terminals per Standard Plans

3 Approach Terminals require lsquoType Ersquo Curb

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Any issues hereYES Wrong

First issuehellipFront slope break should be 6 feet behind guardrail face at post 1 per the Standards (110 Max)

Second issuehellipMisc Asphalt should extend 10 feet upstream of post 1 per Standards

Answerhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach TerminalsYES Wrong

First issuehellipFront slope break should be 6 feet behind guardrail face at post 1 per the Standards (110 Min)

Second issuehellipMisc Asphalt should extend 10 feet upstream of post 1 per Standards

Answerhellip

From Standard Planshellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach TerminalsYES Wrong

First issuehellipFront slope break should be 6 feet behind guardrail face at post 1 per the Standards (110 Min)

Second issuehellipMisc Asphalt should extend 10 feet upstream of post 1 per Standards

Answerhellip

Example of Poor Slope Break Location (and steep slope not shielded)

Photo Credit Bill Fitzgerald PE

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach TerminalsYES Wrong

First issuehellipFront slope break should be 6 feet behind guardrail face at post 1 per the Standards (110 Min)

Second issuehellipMisc Asphalt should extend 10 feet upstream of post 1 per Standards

Answerhellip

Example of Poor Grading (The reason for Misc Asphalt requirement)

Photo Credit Bill Fitzgerald PE

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals SolutionYES Wrong

First issuehellipFront slope break should be 6 feet behind guardrail face at post 1 per the Standards (110 Min)

Second issuehellipMisc Asphalt should extend 10 feet upstream of post 1 per Standards

Answerhellip

Correctedhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Any issues hereYES Wrong

First issuehellipTrees are within the Approach Terminalrsquos clear area in the Standard Plans (where a clear 110 slope required)

Second issuehellipTree violates barrier setback per FDM Table 21542

Answerhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Any issues hereYES Wrong

First issuehellipTrees are within the Approach Terminalrsquos clear area in the Standard Plans (where a clear 110 slope required)

Second issuehellipTree violates barrier setback per FDM Table 21542

Answerhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach TerminalsYES Wrong

First issuehellipTrees are within the Approach Terminalrsquos clear area in the Standard Plans (where a clear 110 slope required)

From Standard Planshellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals

CREDIT VIRGINIA DOT ndash SKT Crash Test Published October 2016

httpswwwyoutubecomwatchv=OsKlfatcjogampfeature=youtube

httpswwwyoutubecomwatchv=h7tct7Oo9-8ampfeature=youtube

YES Wrong

First issuehellipTrees are within the Approach Terminalrsquos clear area in the Standard Plans (where a clear 110 slope required)

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals

CREDIT VIRGINIA DOT ndash SKT Crash Test Published October 2016

httpswwwyoutubecomwatchv=74ImLTY-PhUampfeature=youtube

YES Wrong

First issuehellipTrees are within the Approach Terminalrsquos clear area in the Standard Plans (where a clear 110 slope required)

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach TerminalsYES Wrong

First issuehellipTrees are within the Approach Terminalrsquos clear area in the Standard Plans (where a clear 110 slope required)

From Standard Planshellip

Guardrail Index 536-001

YES Wrong

Second issuehellipTree violates barrier setback per FDM Table 21542

Guardrail Index 536-001

YES Wrong

Second issuehellipTree violates barrier setback per FDM Table 21542

From FDMhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Any issue hereYES Wrong

First issuehellipPerpendicular guardrail is not proven crashworthybull No end treatmentsbull Violates ldquotaper raterdquo

requirements of SPI Part I (big time)

bull Requires shielding if within Clear Zone

Answerhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Any issue hereYES Wrong

Second issuehellipPerpendicular guardrail within the Approach Terminalrsquos clear area in the Standard Plans (where a clear 110 slope required)

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Any issue hereYES Wrong

Third issuehellipPerpendicular guardrail violates barrier setback per FDM Table 21542

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Solution 1

REMOVE theperpendicularGuardrail

Orhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Solution 2

1 Extend Guardrail to meet Length of Need per SPI Part B (Excel lsquoDesign Toolrsquo) which is Roadside Design Guide Eq 5-3

2 Meet minimum barrier setback per FDM Table 21542 (5 feet for general guardrail)

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Final Case StudyAssumptionsbull Design Speed

50 mph

bull Piers designed to withstand 600 kip impact load per FDM215454(Pier Protection Barrier notRequired)

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereAnswerhellip YES

First issuehellipPiers NOT shielded

ldquoLength of Needrdquo NOT met per SPI Part B (Excel Design Tool)

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereAnswerhellip YES

First issuehellipPiers NOT shielded

ldquoLength of Needrdquo NOT met per SPI Part B (Excel Design Tool)

Piers are behind the ldquogatingrdquo(break-away) portion of Approach Terminal

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereYES

Second issuehellipFlared Terminal usage on hold per RDB18-02

Regardlesshellip ldquoTaper Raterdquo too steep here at Approach Terminal (about 13 shown)

Guardrail requires 115 Max Taper Rate per SPI Part I

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereAnswerhellip YES

Third issuehellipldquoBarrier Setbackrdquo requirement likely not satisfied

per FDM Table 21542(5 feet or greater)hellip

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereYES

Fourth issuehellipldquoTrailing Anchoragerdquo not properly extended downstream of hazard

25-foot Requirement SPI C1 amp lsquoLONrsquo Design Tool (Excel)hellip

Answerhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereYES

Fourth issuehellipldquoTrailing Anchoragerdquo not properly extended downstream of hazard

25-foot Requirement SPI C1 amp lsquoLONrsquo Design Tool (Excel)hellip

AnswerhellipFrom lsquoLength of Needrsquo Excel Sheethellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Crash Cushion Index 544-001

Approach Terminals Solution 1lsquoCrash Cushionrsquobull ldquoSystem Widthrdquo ndash

lsquoWidersquo per SPI 544-001 Part C

bull ldquoLength Restrictionrdquo - per SPI 544-001 Part F

bull Contact Central Office for guidance

Note Define Crash Cushion with provided CADD cellhellipldquoSummary of Permanent Crash Cushions Tablerdquo

Guardrail Index 536-001 Crash Cushion Index 544-001

Approach Terminals Solution 1lsquoCrash Cushionrsquobull Guardrail ldquoreduced

post spacingrdquo to reduce required hazard setback per FDM Table 21542

bull Again contact Central Office for guidance for such limited space

Concrete Barrier Index 521-001 Crash Cushion 544-001

Approach Terminals Solution 2lsquoConcrete Barrierrsquo amp lsquoCrash Cushionrsquo

bull Requires project-specific design

bull Contact Central Office for guidance for such limited space

Questions

Richard Stepp PEStandard Plans Engineer

Central Office Roadway Design(850) 414-4313

richardsteppdotstateflus

Standard Plans Single-Slope Barriers

Page 27: Roadside Barriers - MASH Implementation Update & Design ... · Roadside Barriers - Lessons Learned 1. GUARDRAIL Standard Plans, Index 536-001 2. CONCRETE BARRIER Standard Plans, Index

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8 13-14

Rigid Barrier End Shielding Min Length TL-3

lsquoLArsquo 306rsquo

+lsquoLErsquo 531rsquo

=

84rsquoNOTE If these lengths are not possible due to limited space consider the use of a Crash Cushion or a project-specific lsquovariationrsquo to fit the best barrier system possible

Contact Central Office for assistance

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Any issues hereAnswerhellip YES

1 Flared terminals not permitted per RDB18-02

2 Curbed conditions require parallel Approach Terminals per Standard Plans ampSPI Part C3 Approach Terminals require lsquoType Ersquo Curb

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals

From Standard Planshellip

Answerhellip YES

1 Flared terminals not permitted per RDB18-02

2 Curbed conditions require parallel Approach Terminals per Standard Plans ampSPI Part C3 Approach Terminals require lsquoType Ersquo Curb

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Solution

1 Flared terminals not permitted per RDB18-02

2 Curbed conditions require parallel Approach Terminals per Standard Plans

3 Approach Terminals require lsquoType Ersquo Curb

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Any issues hereYES Wrong

First issuehellipFront slope break should be 6 feet behind guardrail face at post 1 per the Standards (110 Max)

Second issuehellipMisc Asphalt should extend 10 feet upstream of post 1 per Standards

Answerhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach TerminalsYES Wrong

First issuehellipFront slope break should be 6 feet behind guardrail face at post 1 per the Standards (110 Min)

Second issuehellipMisc Asphalt should extend 10 feet upstream of post 1 per Standards

Answerhellip

From Standard Planshellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach TerminalsYES Wrong

First issuehellipFront slope break should be 6 feet behind guardrail face at post 1 per the Standards (110 Min)

Second issuehellipMisc Asphalt should extend 10 feet upstream of post 1 per Standards

Answerhellip

Example of Poor Slope Break Location (and steep slope not shielded)

Photo Credit Bill Fitzgerald PE

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach TerminalsYES Wrong

First issuehellipFront slope break should be 6 feet behind guardrail face at post 1 per the Standards (110 Min)

Second issuehellipMisc Asphalt should extend 10 feet upstream of post 1 per Standards

Answerhellip

Example of Poor Grading (The reason for Misc Asphalt requirement)

Photo Credit Bill Fitzgerald PE

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals SolutionYES Wrong

First issuehellipFront slope break should be 6 feet behind guardrail face at post 1 per the Standards (110 Min)

Second issuehellipMisc Asphalt should extend 10 feet upstream of post 1 per Standards

Answerhellip

Correctedhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Any issues hereYES Wrong

First issuehellipTrees are within the Approach Terminalrsquos clear area in the Standard Plans (where a clear 110 slope required)

Second issuehellipTree violates barrier setback per FDM Table 21542

Answerhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Any issues hereYES Wrong

First issuehellipTrees are within the Approach Terminalrsquos clear area in the Standard Plans (where a clear 110 slope required)

Second issuehellipTree violates barrier setback per FDM Table 21542

Answerhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach TerminalsYES Wrong

First issuehellipTrees are within the Approach Terminalrsquos clear area in the Standard Plans (where a clear 110 slope required)

From Standard Planshellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals

CREDIT VIRGINIA DOT ndash SKT Crash Test Published October 2016

httpswwwyoutubecomwatchv=OsKlfatcjogampfeature=youtube

httpswwwyoutubecomwatchv=h7tct7Oo9-8ampfeature=youtube

YES Wrong

First issuehellipTrees are within the Approach Terminalrsquos clear area in the Standard Plans (where a clear 110 slope required)

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals

CREDIT VIRGINIA DOT ndash SKT Crash Test Published October 2016

httpswwwyoutubecomwatchv=74ImLTY-PhUampfeature=youtube

YES Wrong

First issuehellipTrees are within the Approach Terminalrsquos clear area in the Standard Plans (where a clear 110 slope required)

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach TerminalsYES Wrong

First issuehellipTrees are within the Approach Terminalrsquos clear area in the Standard Plans (where a clear 110 slope required)

From Standard Planshellip

Guardrail Index 536-001

YES Wrong

Second issuehellipTree violates barrier setback per FDM Table 21542

Guardrail Index 536-001

YES Wrong

Second issuehellipTree violates barrier setback per FDM Table 21542

From FDMhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Any issue hereYES Wrong

First issuehellipPerpendicular guardrail is not proven crashworthybull No end treatmentsbull Violates ldquotaper raterdquo

requirements of SPI Part I (big time)

bull Requires shielding if within Clear Zone

Answerhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Any issue hereYES Wrong

Second issuehellipPerpendicular guardrail within the Approach Terminalrsquos clear area in the Standard Plans (where a clear 110 slope required)

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Any issue hereYES Wrong

Third issuehellipPerpendicular guardrail violates barrier setback per FDM Table 21542

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Solution 1

REMOVE theperpendicularGuardrail

Orhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Solution 2

1 Extend Guardrail to meet Length of Need per SPI Part B (Excel lsquoDesign Toolrsquo) which is Roadside Design Guide Eq 5-3

2 Meet minimum barrier setback per FDM Table 21542 (5 feet for general guardrail)

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Final Case StudyAssumptionsbull Design Speed

50 mph

bull Piers designed to withstand 600 kip impact load per FDM215454(Pier Protection Barrier notRequired)

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereAnswerhellip YES

First issuehellipPiers NOT shielded

ldquoLength of Needrdquo NOT met per SPI Part B (Excel Design Tool)

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereAnswerhellip YES

First issuehellipPiers NOT shielded

ldquoLength of Needrdquo NOT met per SPI Part B (Excel Design Tool)

Piers are behind the ldquogatingrdquo(break-away) portion of Approach Terminal

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereYES

Second issuehellipFlared Terminal usage on hold per RDB18-02

Regardlesshellip ldquoTaper Raterdquo too steep here at Approach Terminal (about 13 shown)

Guardrail requires 115 Max Taper Rate per SPI Part I

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereAnswerhellip YES

Third issuehellipldquoBarrier Setbackrdquo requirement likely not satisfied

per FDM Table 21542(5 feet or greater)hellip

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereYES

Fourth issuehellipldquoTrailing Anchoragerdquo not properly extended downstream of hazard

25-foot Requirement SPI C1 amp lsquoLONrsquo Design Tool (Excel)hellip

Answerhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereYES

Fourth issuehellipldquoTrailing Anchoragerdquo not properly extended downstream of hazard

25-foot Requirement SPI C1 amp lsquoLONrsquo Design Tool (Excel)hellip

AnswerhellipFrom lsquoLength of Needrsquo Excel Sheethellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Crash Cushion Index 544-001

Approach Terminals Solution 1lsquoCrash Cushionrsquobull ldquoSystem Widthrdquo ndash

lsquoWidersquo per SPI 544-001 Part C

bull ldquoLength Restrictionrdquo - per SPI 544-001 Part F

bull Contact Central Office for guidance

Note Define Crash Cushion with provided CADD cellhellipldquoSummary of Permanent Crash Cushions Tablerdquo

Guardrail Index 536-001 Crash Cushion Index 544-001

Approach Terminals Solution 1lsquoCrash Cushionrsquobull Guardrail ldquoreduced

post spacingrdquo to reduce required hazard setback per FDM Table 21542

bull Again contact Central Office for guidance for such limited space

Concrete Barrier Index 521-001 Crash Cushion 544-001

Approach Terminals Solution 2lsquoConcrete Barrierrsquo amp lsquoCrash Cushionrsquo

bull Requires project-specific design

bull Contact Central Office for guidance for such limited space

Questions

Richard Stepp PEStandard Plans Engineer

Central Office Roadway Design(850) 414-4313

richardsteppdotstateflus

Standard Plans Single-Slope Barriers

Page 28: Roadside Barriers - MASH Implementation Update & Design ... · Roadside Barriers - Lessons Learned 1. GUARDRAIL Standard Plans, Index 536-001 2. CONCRETE BARRIER Standard Plans, Index

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Any issues hereAnswerhellip YES

1 Flared terminals not permitted per RDB18-02

2 Curbed conditions require parallel Approach Terminals per Standard Plans ampSPI Part C3 Approach Terminals require lsquoType Ersquo Curb

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals

From Standard Planshellip

Answerhellip YES

1 Flared terminals not permitted per RDB18-02

2 Curbed conditions require parallel Approach Terminals per Standard Plans ampSPI Part C3 Approach Terminals require lsquoType Ersquo Curb

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Solution

1 Flared terminals not permitted per RDB18-02

2 Curbed conditions require parallel Approach Terminals per Standard Plans

3 Approach Terminals require lsquoType Ersquo Curb

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Any issues hereYES Wrong

First issuehellipFront slope break should be 6 feet behind guardrail face at post 1 per the Standards (110 Max)

Second issuehellipMisc Asphalt should extend 10 feet upstream of post 1 per Standards

Answerhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach TerminalsYES Wrong

First issuehellipFront slope break should be 6 feet behind guardrail face at post 1 per the Standards (110 Min)

Second issuehellipMisc Asphalt should extend 10 feet upstream of post 1 per Standards

Answerhellip

From Standard Planshellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach TerminalsYES Wrong

First issuehellipFront slope break should be 6 feet behind guardrail face at post 1 per the Standards (110 Min)

Second issuehellipMisc Asphalt should extend 10 feet upstream of post 1 per Standards

Answerhellip

Example of Poor Slope Break Location (and steep slope not shielded)

Photo Credit Bill Fitzgerald PE

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach TerminalsYES Wrong

First issuehellipFront slope break should be 6 feet behind guardrail face at post 1 per the Standards (110 Min)

Second issuehellipMisc Asphalt should extend 10 feet upstream of post 1 per Standards

Answerhellip

Example of Poor Grading (The reason for Misc Asphalt requirement)

Photo Credit Bill Fitzgerald PE

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals SolutionYES Wrong

First issuehellipFront slope break should be 6 feet behind guardrail face at post 1 per the Standards (110 Min)

Second issuehellipMisc Asphalt should extend 10 feet upstream of post 1 per Standards

Answerhellip

Correctedhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Any issues hereYES Wrong

First issuehellipTrees are within the Approach Terminalrsquos clear area in the Standard Plans (where a clear 110 slope required)

Second issuehellipTree violates barrier setback per FDM Table 21542

Answerhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Any issues hereYES Wrong

First issuehellipTrees are within the Approach Terminalrsquos clear area in the Standard Plans (where a clear 110 slope required)

Second issuehellipTree violates barrier setback per FDM Table 21542

Answerhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach TerminalsYES Wrong

First issuehellipTrees are within the Approach Terminalrsquos clear area in the Standard Plans (where a clear 110 slope required)

From Standard Planshellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals

CREDIT VIRGINIA DOT ndash SKT Crash Test Published October 2016

httpswwwyoutubecomwatchv=OsKlfatcjogampfeature=youtube

httpswwwyoutubecomwatchv=h7tct7Oo9-8ampfeature=youtube

YES Wrong

First issuehellipTrees are within the Approach Terminalrsquos clear area in the Standard Plans (where a clear 110 slope required)

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals

CREDIT VIRGINIA DOT ndash SKT Crash Test Published October 2016

httpswwwyoutubecomwatchv=74ImLTY-PhUampfeature=youtube

YES Wrong

First issuehellipTrees are within the Approach Terminalrsquos clear area in the Standard Plans (where a clear 110 slope required)

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach TerminalsYES Wrong

First issuehellipTrees are within the Approach Terminalrsquos clear area in the Standard Plans (where a clear 110 slope required)

From Standard Planshellip

Guardrail Index 536-001

YES Wrong

Second issuehellipTree violates barrier setback per FDM Table 21542

Guardrail Index 536-001

YES Wrong

Second issuehellipTree violates barrier setback per FDM Table 21542

From FDMhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Any issue hereYES Wrong

First issuehellipPerpendicular guardrail is not proven crashworthybull No end treatmentsbull Violates ldquotaper raterdquo

requirements of SPI Part I (big time)

bull Requires shielding if within Clear Zone

Answerhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Any issue hereYES Wrong

Second issuehellipPerpendicular guardrail within the Approach Terminalrsquos clear area in the Standard Plans (where a clear 110 slope required)

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Any issue hereYES Wrong

Third issuehellipPerpendicular guardrail violates barrier setback per FDM Table 21542

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Solution 1

REMOVE theperpendicularGuardrail

Orhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Solution 2

1 Extend Guardrail to meet Length of Need per SPI Part B (Excel lsquoDesign Toolrsquo) which is Roadside Design Guide Eq 5-3

2 Meet minimum barrier setback per FDM Table 21542 (5 feet for general guardrail)

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Final Case StudyAssumptionsbull Design Speed

50 mph

bull Piers designed to withstand 600 kip impact load per FDM215454(Pier Protection Barrier notRequired)

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereAnswerhellip YES

First issuehellipPiers NOT shielded

ldquoLength of Needrdquo NOT met per SPI Part B (Excel Design Tool)

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereAnswerhellip YES

First issuehellipPiers NOT shielded

ldquoLength of Needrdquo NOT met per SPI Part B (Excel Design Tool)

Piers are behind the ldquogatingrdquo(break-away) portion of Approach Terminal

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereYES

Second issuehellipFlared Terminal usage on hold per RDB18-02

Regardlesshellip ldquoTaper Raterdquo too steep here at Approach Terminal (about 13 shown)

Guardrail requires 115 Max Taper Rate per SPI Part I

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereAnswerhellip YES

Third issuehellipldquoBarrier Setbackrdquo requirement likely not satisfied

per FDM Table 21542(5 feet or greater)hellip

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereYES

Fourth issuehellipldquoTrailing Anchoragerdquo not properly extended downstream of hazard

25-foot Requirement SPI C1 amp lsquoLONrsquo Design Tool (Excel)hellip

Answerhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereYES

Fourth issuehellipldquoTrailing Anchoragerdquo not properly extended downstream of hazard

25-foot Requirement SPI C1 amp lsquoLONrsquo Design Tool (Excel)hellip

AnswerhellipFrom lsquoLength of Needrsquo Excel Sheethellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Crash Cushion Index 544-001

Approach Terminals Solution 1lsquoCrash Cushionrsquobull ldquoSystem Widthrdquo ndash

lsquoWidersquo per SPI 544-001 Part C

bull ldquoLength Restrictionrdquo - per SPI 544-001 Part F

bull Contact Central Office for guidance

Note Define Crash Cushion with provided CADD cellhellipldquoSummary of Permanent Crash Cushions Tablerdquo

Guardrail Index 536-001 Crash Cushion Index 544-001

Approach Terminals Solution 1lsquoCrash Cushionrsquobull Guardrail ldquoreduced

post spacingrdquo to reduce required hazard setback per FDM Table 21542

bull Again contact Central Office for guidance for such limited space

Concrete Barrier Index 521-001 Crash Cushion 544-001

Approach Terminals Solution 2lsquoConcrete Barrierrsquo amp lsquoCrash Cushionrsquo

bull Requires project-specific design

bull Contact Central Office for guidance for such limited space

Questions

Richard Stepp PEStandard Plans Engineer

Central Office Roadway Design(850) 414-4313

richardsteppdotstateflus

Standard Plans Single-Slope Barriers

Page 29: Roadside Barriers - MASH Implementation Update & Design ... · Roadside Barriers - Lessons Learned 1. GUARDRAIL Standard Plans, Index 536-001 2. CONCRETE BARRIER Standard Plans, Index

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Any issues hereAnswerhellip YES

1 Flared terminals not permitted per RDB18-02

2 Curbed conditions require parallel Approach Terminals per Standard Plans ampSPI Part C3 Approach Terminals require lsquoType Ersquo Curb

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals

From Standard Planshellip

Answerhellip YES

1 Flared terminals not permitted per RDB18-02

2 Curbed conditions require parallel Approach Terminals per Standard Plans ampSPI Part C3 Approach Terminals require lsquoType Ersquo Curb

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Solution

1 Flared terminals not permitted per RDB18-02

2 Curbed conditions require parallel Approach Terminals per Standard Plans

3 Approach Terminals require lsquoType Ersquo Curb

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Any issues hereYES Wrong

First issuehellipFront slope break should be 6 feet behind guardrail face at post 1 per the Standards (110 Max)

Second issuehellipMisc Asphalt should extend 10 feet upstream of post 1 per Standards

Answerhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach TerminalsYES Wrong

First issuehellipFront slope break should be 6 feet behind guardrail face at post 1 per the Standards (110 Min)

Second issuehellipMisc Asphalt should extend 10 feet upstream of post 1 per Standards

Answerhellip

From Standard Planshellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach TerminalsYES Wrong

First issuehellipFront slope break should be 6 feet behind guardrail face at post 1 per the Standards (110 Min)

Second issuehellipMisc Asphalt should extend 10 feet upstream of post 1 per Standards

Answerhellip

Example of Poor Slope Break Location (and steep slope not shielded)

Photo Credit Bill Fitzgerald PE

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach TerminalsYES Wrong

First issuehellipFront slope break should be 6 feet behind guardrail face at post 1 per the Standards (110 Min)

Second issuehellipMisc Asphalt should extend 10 feet upstream of post 1 per Standards

Answerhellip

Example of Poor Grading (The reason for Misc Asphalt requirement)

Photo Credit Bill Fitzgerald PE

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals SolutionYES Wrong

First issuehellipFront slope break should be 6 feet behind guardrail face at post 1 per the Standards (110 Min)

Second issuehellipMisc Asphalt should extend 10 feet upstream of post 1 per Standards

Answerhellip

Correctedhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Any issues hereYES Wrong

First issuehellipTrees are within the Approach Terminalrsquos clear area in the Standard Plans (where a clear 110 slope required)

Second issuehellipTree violates barrier setback per FDM Table 21542

Answerhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Any issues hereYES Wrong

First issuehellipTrees are within the Approach Terminalrsquos clear area in the Standard Plans (where a clear 110 slope required)

Second issuehellipTree violates barrier setback per FDM Table 21542

Answerhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach TerminalsYES Wrong

First issuehellipTrees are within the Approach Terminalrsquos clear area in the Standard Plans (where a clear 110 slope required)

From Standard Planshellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals

CREDIT VIRGINIA DOT ndash SKT Crash Test Published October 2016

httpswwwyoutubecomwatchv=OsKlfatcjogampfeature=youtube

httpswwwyoutubecomwatchv=h7tct7Oo9-8ampfeature=youtube

YES Wrong

First issuehellipTrees are within the Approach Terminalrsquos clear area in the Standard Plans (where a clear 110 slope required)

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals

CREDIT VIRGINIA DOT ndash SKT Crash Test Published October 2016

httpswwwyoutubecomwatchv=74ImLTY-PhUampfeature=youtube

YES Wrong

First issuehellipTrees are within the Approach Terminalrsquos clear area in the Standard Plans (where a clear 110 slope required)

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach TerminalsYES Wrong

First issuehellipTrees are within the Approach Terminalrsquos clear area in the Standard Plans (where a clear 110 slope required)

From Standard Planshellip

Guardrail Index 536-001

YES Wrong

Second issuehellipTree violates barrier setback per FDM Table 21542

Guardrail Index 536-001

YES Wrong

Second issuehellipTree violates barrier setback per FDM Table 21542

From FDMhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Any issue hereYES Wrong

First issuehellipPerpendicular guardrail is not proven crashworthybull No end treatmentsbull Violates ldquotaper raterdquo

requirements of SPI Part I (big time)

bull Requires shielding if within Clear Zone

Answerhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Any issue hereYES Wrong

Second issuehellipPerpendicular guardrail within the Approach Terminalrsquos clear area in the Standard Plans (where a clear 110 slope required)

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Any issue hereYES Wrong

Third issuehellipPerpendicular guardrail violates barrier setback per FDM Table 21542

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Solution 1

REMOVE theperpendicularGuardrail

Orhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Solution 2

1 Extend Guardrail to meet Length of Need per SPI Part B (Excel lsquoDesign Toolrsquo) which is Roadside Design Guide Eq 5-3

2 Meet minimum barrier setback per FDM Table 21542 (5 feet for general guardrail)

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Final Case StudyAssumptionsbull Design Speed

50 mph

bull Piers designed to withstand 600 kip impact load per FDM215454(Pier Protection Barrier notRequired)

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereAnswerhellip YES

First issuehellipPiers NOT shielded

ldquoLength of Needrdquo NOT met per SPI Part B (Excel Design Tool)

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereAnswerhellip YES

First issuehellipPiers NOT shielded

ldquoLength of Needrdquo NOT met per SPI Part B (Excel Design Tool)

Piers are behind the ldquogatingrdquo(break-away) portion of Approach Terminal

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereYES

Second issuehellipFlared Terminal usage on hold per RDB18-02

Regardlesshellip ldquoTaper Raterdquo too steep here at Approach Terminal (about 13 shown)

Guardrail requires 115 Max Taper Rate per SPI Part I

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereAnswerhellip YES

Third issuehellipldquoBarrier Setbackrdquo requirement likely not satisfied

per FDM Table 21542(5 feet or greater)hellip

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereYES

Fourth issuehellipldquoTrailing Anchoragerdquo not properly extended downstream of hazard

25-foot Requirement SPI C1 amp lsquoLONrsquo Design Tool (Excel)hellip

Answerhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereYES

Fourth issuehellipldquoTrailing Anchoragerdquo not properly extended downstream of hazard

25-foot Requirement SPI C1 amp lsquoLONrsquo Design Tool (Excel)hellip

AnswerhellipFrom lsquoLength of Needrsquo Excel Sheethellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Crash Cushion Index 544-001

Approach Terminals Solution 1lsquoCrash Cushionrsquobull ldquoSystem Widthrdquo ndash

lsquoWidersquo per SPI 544-001 Part C

bull ldquoLength Restrictionrdquo - per SPI 544-001 Part F

bull Contact Central Office for guidance

Note Define Crash Cushion with provided CADD cellhellipldquoSummary of Permanent Crash Cushions Tablerdquo

Guardrail Index 536-001 Crash Cushion Index 544-001

Approach Terminals Solution 1lsquoCrash Cushionrsquobull Guardrail ldquoreduced

post spacingrdquo to reduce required hazard setback per FDM Table 21542

bull Again contact Central Office for guidance for such limited space

Concrete Barrier Index 521-001 Crash Cushion 544-001

Approach Terminals Solution 2lsquoConcrete Barrierrsquo amp lsquoCrash Cushionrsquo

bull Requires project-specific design

bull Contact Central Office for guidance for such limited space

Questions

Richard Stepp PEStandard Plans Engineer

Central Office Roadway Design(850) 414-4313

richardsteppdotstateflus

Standard Plans Single-Slope Barriers

Page 30: Roadside Barriers - MASH Implementation Update & Design ... · Roadside Barriers - Lessons Learned 1. GUARDRAIL Standard Plans, Index 536-001 2. CONCRETE BARRIER Standard Plans, Index

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals

From Standard Planshellip

Answerhellip YES

1 Flared terminals not permitted per RDB18-02

2 Curbed conditions require parallel Approach Terminals per Standard Plans ampSPI Part C3 Approach Terminals require lsquoType Ersquo Curb

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Solution

1 Flared terminals not permitted per RDB18-02

2 Curbed conditions require parallel Approach Terminals per Standard Plans

3 Approach Terminals require lsquoType Ersquo Curb

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Any issues hereYES Wrong

First issuehellipFront slope break should be 6 feet behind guardrail face at post 1 per the Standards (110 Max)

Second issuehellipMisc Asphalt should extend 10 feet upstream of post 1 per Standards

Answerhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach TerminalsYES Wrong

First issuehellipFront slope break should be 6 feet behind guardrail face at post 1 per the Standards (110 Min)

Second issuehellipMisc Asphalt should extend 10 feet upstream of post 1 per Standards

Answerhellip

From Standard Planshellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach TerminalsYES Wrong

First issuehellipFront slope break should be 6 feet behind guardrail face at post 1 per the Standards (110 Min)

Second issuehellipMisc Asphalt should extend 10 feet upstream of post 1 per Standards

Answerhellip

Example of Poor Slope Break Location (and steep slope not shielded)

Photo Credit Bill Fitzgerald PE

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach TerminalsYES Wrong

First issuehellipFront slope break should be 6 feet behind guardrail face at post 1 per the Standards (110 Min)

Second issuehellipMisc Asphalt should extend 10 feet upstream of post 1 per Standards

Answerhellip

Example of Poor Grading (The reason for Misc Asphalt requirement)

Photo Credit Bill Fitzgerald PE

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals SolutionYES Wrong

First issuehellipFront slope break should be 6 feet behind guardrail face at post 1 per the Standards (110 Min)

Second issuehellipMisc Asphalt should extend 10 feet upstream of post 1 per Standards

Answerhellip

Correctedhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Any issues hereYES Wrong

First issuehellipTrees are within the Approach Terminalrsquos clear area in the Standard Plans (where a clear 110 slope required)

Second issuehellipTree violates barrier setback per FDM Table 21542

Answerhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Any issues hereYES Wrong

First issuehellipTrees are within the Approach Terminalrsquos clear area in the Standard Plans (where a clear 110 slope required)

Second issuehellipTree violates barrier setback per FDM Table 21542

Answerhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach TerminalsYES Wrong

First issuehellipTrees are within the Approach Terminalrsquos clear area in the Standard Plans (where a clear 110 slope required)

From Standard Planshellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals

CREDIT VIRGINIA DOT ndash SKT Crash Test Published October 2016

httpswwwyoutubecomwatchv=OsKlfatcjogampfeature=youtube

httpswwwyoutubecomwatchv=h7tct7Oo9-8ampfeature=youtube

YES Wrong

First issuehellipTrees are within the Approach Terminalrsquos clear area in the Standard Plans (where a clear 110 slope required)

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals

CREDIT VIRGINIA DOT ndash SKT Crash Test Published October 2016

httpswwwyoutubecomwatchv=74ImLTY-PhUampfeature=youtube

YES Wrong

First issuehellipTrees are within the Approach Terminalrsquos clear area in the Standard Plans (where a clear 110 slope required)

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach TerminalsYES Wrong

First issuehellipTrees are within the Approach Terminalrsquos clear area in the Standard Plans (where a clear 110 slope required)

From Standard Planshellip

Guardrail Index 536-001

YES Wrong

Second issuehellipTree violates barrier setback per FDM Table 21542

Guardrail Index 536-001

YES Wrong

Second issuehellipTree violates barrier setback per FDM Table 21542

From FDMhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Any issue hereYES Wrong

First issuehellipPerpendicular guardrail is not proven crashworthybull No end treatmentsbull Violates ldquotaper raterdquo

requirements of SPI Part I (big time)

bull Requires shielding if within Clear Zone

Answerhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Any issue hereYES Wrong

Second issuehellipPerpendicular guardrail within the Approach Terminalrsquos clear area in the Standard Plans (where a clear 110 slope required)

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Any issue hereYES Wrong

Third issuehellipPerpendicular guardrail violates barrier setback per FDM Table 21542

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Solution 1

REMOVE theperpendicularGuardrail

Orhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Solution 2

1 Extend Guardrail to meet Length of Need per SPI Part B (Excel lsquoDesign Toolrsquo) which is Roadside Design Guide Eq 5-3

2 Meet minimum barrier setback per FDM Table 21542 (5 feet for general guardrail)

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Final Case StudyAssumptionsbull Design Speed

50 mph

bull Piers designed to withstand 600 kip impact load per FDM215454(Pier Protection Barrier notRequired)

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereAnswerhellip YES

First issuehellipPiers NOT shielded

ldquoLength of Needrdquo NOT met per SPI Part B (Excel Design Tool)

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereAnswerhellip YES

First issuehellipPiers NOT shielded

ldquoLength of Needrdquo NOT met per SPI Part B (Excel Design Tool)

Piers are behind the ldquogatingrdquo(break-away) portion of Approach Terminal

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereYES

Second issuehellipFlared Terminal usage on hold per RDB18-02

Regardlesshellip ldquoTaper Raterdquo too steep here at Approach Terminal (about 13 shown)

Guardrail requires 115 Max Taper Rate per SPI Part I

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereAnswerhellip YES

Third issuehellipldquoBarrier Setbackrdquo requirement likely not satisfied

per FDM Table 21542(5 feet or greater)hellip

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereYES

Fourth issuehellipldquoTrailing Anchoragerdquo not properly extended downstream of hazard

25-foot Requirement SPI C1 amp lsquoLONrsquo Design Tool (Excel)hellip

Answerhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereYES

Fourth issuehellipldquoTrailing Anchoragerdquo not properly extended downstream of hazard

25-foot Requirement SPI C1 amp lsquoLONrsquo Design Tool (Excel)hellip

AnswerhellipFrom lsquoLength of Needrsquo Excel Sheethellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Crash Cushion Index 544-001

Approach Terminals Solution 1lsquoCrash Cushionrsquobull ldquoSystem Widthrdquo ndash

lsquoWidersquo per SPI 544-001 Part C

bull ldquoLength Restrictionrdquo - per SPI 544-001 Part F

bull Contact Central Office for guidance

Note Define Crash Cushion with provided CADD cellhellipldquoSummary of Permanent Crash Cushions Tablerdquo

Guardrail Index 536-001 Crash Cushion Index 544-001

Approach Terminals Solution 1lsquoCrash Cushionrsquobull Guardrail ldquoreduced

post spacingrdquo to reduce required hazard setback per FDM Table 21542

bull Again contact Central Office for guidance for such limited space

Concrete Barrier Index 521-001 Crash Cushion 544-001

Approach Terminals Solution 2lsquoConcrete Barrierrsquo amp lsquoCrash Cushionrsquo

bull Requires project-specific design

bull Contact Central Office for guidance for such limited space

Questions

Richard Stepp PEStandard Plans Engineer

Central Office Roadway Design(850) 414-4313

richardsteppdotstateflus

Standard Plans Single-Slope Barriers

Page 31: Roadside Barriers - MASH Implementation Update & Design ... · Roadside Barriers - Lessons Learned 1. GUARDRAIL Standard Plans, Index 536-001 2. CONCRETE BARRIER Standard Plans, Index

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Solution

1 Flared terminals not permitted per RDB18-02

2 Curbed conditions require parallel Approach Terminals per Standard Plans

3 Approach Terminals require lsquoType Ersquo Curb

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Any issues hereYES Wrong

First issuehellipFront slope break should be 6 feet behind guardrail face at post 1 per the Standards (110 Max)

Second issuehellipMisc Asphalt should extend 10 feet upstream of post 1 per Standards

Answerhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach TerminalsYES Wrong

First issuehellipFront slope break should be 6 feet behind guardrail face at post 1 per the Standards (110 Min)

Second issuehellipMisc Asphalt should extend 10 feet upstream of post 1 per Standards

Answerhellip

From Standard Planshellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach TerminalsYES Wrong

First issuehellipFront slope break should be 6 feet behind guardrail face at post 1 per the Standards (110 Min)

Second issuehellipMisc Asphalt should extend 10 feet upstream of post 1 per Standards

Answerhellip

Example of Poor Slope Break Location (and steep slope not shielded)

Photo Credit Bill Fitzgerald PE

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach TerminalsYES Wrong

First issuehellipFront slope break should be 6 feet behind guardrail face at post 1 per the Standards (110 Min)

Second issuehellipMisc Asphalt should extend 10 feet upstream of post 1 per Standards

Answerhellip

Example of Poor Grading (The reason for Misc Asphalt requirement)

Photo Credit Bill Fitzgerald PE

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals SolutionYES Wrong

First issuehellipFront slope break should be 6 feet behind guardrail face at post 1 per the Standards (110 Min)

Second issuehellipMisc Asphalt should extend 10 feet upstream of post 1 per Standards

Answerhellip

Correctedhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Any issues hereYES Wrong

First issuehellipTrees are within the Approach Terminalrsquos clear area in the Standard Plans (where a clear 110 slope required)

Second issuehellipTree violates barrier setback per FDM Table 21542

Answerhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Any issues hereYES Wrong

First issuehellipTrees are within the Approach Terminalrsquos clear area in the Standard Plans (where a clear 110 slope required)

Second issuehellipTree violates barrier setback per FDM Table 21542

Answerhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach TerminalsYES Wrong

First issuehellipTrees are within the Approach Terminalrsquos clear area in the Standard Plans (where a clear 110 slope required)

From Standard Planshellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals

CREDIT VIRGINIA DOT ndash SKT Crash Test Published October 2016

httpswwwyoutubecomwatchv=OsKlfatcjogampfeature=youtube

httpswwwyoutubecomwatchv=h7tct7Oo9-8ampfeature=youtube

YES Wrong

First issuehellipTrees are within the Approach Terminalrsquos clear area in the Standard Plans (where a clear 110 slope required)

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals

CREDIT VIRGINIA DOT ndash SKT Crash Test Published October 2016

httpswwwyoutubecomwatchv=74ImLTY-PhUampfeature=youtube

YES Wrong

First issuehellipTrees are within the Approach Terminalrsquos clear area in the Standard Plans (where a clear 110 slope required)

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach TerminalsYES Wrong

First issuehellipTrees are within the Approach Terminalrsquos clear area in the Standard Plans (where a clear 110 slope required)

From Standard Planshellip

Guardrail Index 536-001

YES Wrong

Second issuehellipTree violates barrier setback per FDM Table 21542

Guardrail Index 536-001

YES Wrong

Second issuehellipTree violates barrier setback per FDM Table 21542

From FDMhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Any issue hereYES Wrong

First issuehellipPerpendicular guardrail is not proven crashworthybull No end treatmentsbull Violates ldquotaper raterdquo

requirements of SPI Part I (big time)

bull Requires shielding if within Clear Zone

Answerhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Any issue hereYES Wrong

Second issuehellipPerpendicular guardrail within the Approach Terminalrsquos clear area in the Standard Plans (where a clear 110 slope required)

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Any issue hereYES Wrong

Third issuehellipPerpendicular guardrail violates barrier setback per FDM Table 21542

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Solution 1

REMOVE theperpendicularGuardrail

Orhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Solution 2

1 Extend Guardrail to meet Length of Need per SPI Part B (Excel lsquoDesign Toolrsquo) which is Roadside Design Guide Eq 5-3

2 Meet minimum barrier setback per FDM Table 21542 (5 feet for general guardrail)

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Final Case StudyAssumptionsbull Design Speed

50 mph

bull Piers designed to withstand 600 kip impact load per FDM215454(Pier Protection Barrier notRequired)

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereAnswerhellip YES

First issuehellipPiers NOT shielded

ldquoLength of Needrdquo NOT met per SPI Part B (Excel Design Tool)

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereAnswerhellip YES

First issuehellipPiers NOT shielded

ldquoLength of Needrdquo NOT met per SPI Part B (Excel Design Tool)

Piers are behind the ldquogatingrdquo(break-away) portion of Approach Terminal

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereYES

Second issuehellipFlared Terminal usage on hold per RDB18-02

Regardlesshellip ldquoTaper Raterdquo too steep here at Approach Terminal (about 13 shown)

Guardrail requires 115 Max Taper Rate per SPI Part I

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereAnswerhellip YES

Third issuehellipldquoBarrier Setbackrdquo requirement likely not satisfied

per FDM Table 21542(5 feet or greater)hellip

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereYES

Fourth issuehellipldquoTrailing Anchoragerdquo not properly extended downstream of hazard

25-foot Requirement SPI C1 amp lsquoLONrsquo Design Tool (Excel)hellip

Answerhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereYES

Fourth issuehellipldquoTrailing Anchoragerdquo not properly extended downstream of hazard

25-foot Requirement SPI C1 amp lsquoLONrsquo Design Tool (Excel)hellip

AnswerhellipFrom lsquoLength of Needrsquo Excel Sheethellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Crash Cushion Index 544-001

Approach Terminals Solution 1lsquoCrash Cushionrsquobull ldquoSystem Widthrdquo ndash

lsquoWidersquo per SPI 544-001 Part C

bull ldquoLength Restrictionrdquo - per SPI 544-001 Part F

bull Contact Central Office for guidance

Note Define Crash Cushion with provided CADD cellhellipldquoSummary of Permanent Crash Cushions Tablerdquo

Guardrail Index 536-001 Crash Cushion Index 544-001

Approach Terminals Solution 1lsquoCrash Cushionrsquobull Guardrail ldquoreduced

post spacingrdquo to reduce required hazard setback per FDM Table 21542

bull Again contact Central Office for guidance for such limited space

Concrete Barrier Index 521-001 Crash Cushion 544-001

Approach Terminals Solution 2lsquoConcrete Barrierrsquo amp lsquoCrash Cushionrsquo

bull Requires project-specific design

bull Contact Central Office for guidance for such limited space

Questions

Richard Stepp PEStandard Plans Engineer

Central Office Roadway Design(850) 414-4313

richardsteppdotstateflus

Standard Plans Single-Slope Barriers

Page 32: Roadside Barriers - MASH Implementation Update & Design ... · Roadside Barriers - Lessons Learned 1. GUARDRAIL Standard Plans, Index 536-001 2. CONCRETE BARRIER Standard Plans, Index

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Any issues hereYES Wrong

First issuehellipFront slope break should be 6 feet behind guardrail face at post 1 per the Standards (110 Max)

Second issuehellipMisc Asphalt should extend 10 feet upstream of post 1 per Standards

Answerhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach TerminalsYES Wrong

First issuehellipFront slope break should be 6 feet behind guardrail face at post 1 per the Standards (110 Min)

Second issuehellipMisc Asphalt should extend 10 feet upstream of post 1 per Standards

Answerhellip

From Standard Planshellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach TerminalsYES Wrong

First issuehellipFront slope break should be 6 feet behind guardrail face at post 1 per the Standards (110 Min)

Second issuehellipMisc Asphalt should extend 10 feet upstream of post 1 per Standards

Answerhellip

Example of Poor Slope Break Location (and steep slope not shielded)

Photo Credit Bill Fitzgerald PE

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach TerminalsYES Wrong

First issuehellipFront slope break should be 6 feet behind guardrail face at post 1 per the Standards (110 Min)

Second issuehellipMisc Asphalt should extend 10 feet upstream of post 1 per Standards

Answerhellip

Example of Poor Grading (The reason for Misc Asphalt requirement)

Photo Credit Bill Fitzgerald PE

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals SolutionYES Wrong

First issuehellipFront slope break should be 6 feet behind guardrail face at post 1 per the Standards (110 Min)

Second issuehellipMisc Asphalt should extend 10 feet upstream of post 1 per Standards

Answerhellip

Correctedhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Any issues hereYES Wrong

First issuehellipTrees are within the Approach Terminalrsquos clear area in the Standard Plans (where a clear 110 slope required)

Second issuehellipTree violates barrier setback per FDM Table 21542

Answerhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Any issues hereYES Wrong

First issuehellipTrees are within the Approach Terminalrsquos clear area in the Standard Plans (where a clear 110 slope required)

Second issuehellipTree violates barrier setback per FDM Table 21542

Answerhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach TerminalsYES Wrong

First issuehellipTrees are within the Approach Terminalrsquos clear area in the Standard Plans (where a clear 110 slope required)

From Standard Planshellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals

CREDIT VIRGINIA DOT ndash SKT Crash Test Published October 2016

httpswwwyoutubecomwatchv=OsKlfatcjogampfeature=youtube

httpswwwyoutubecomwatchv=h7tct7Oo9-8ampfeature=youtube

YES Wrong

First issuehellipTrees are within the Approach Terminalrsquos clear area in the Standard Plans (where a clear 110 slope required)

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals

CREDIT VIRGINIA DOT ndash SKT Crash Test Published October 2016

httpswwwyoutubecomwatchv=74ImLTY-PhUampfeature=youtube

YES Wrong

First issuehellipTrees are within the Approach Terminalrsquos clear area in the Standard Plans (where a clear 110 slope required)

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach TerminalsYES Wrong

First issuehellipTrees are within the Approach Terminalrsquos clear area in the Standard Plans (where a clear 110 slope required)

From Standard Planshellip

Guardrail Index 536-001

YES Wrong

Second issuehellipTree violates barrier setback per FDM Table 21542

Guardrail Index 536-001

YES Wrong

Second issuehellipTree violates barrier setback per FDM Table 21542

From FDMhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Any issue hereYES Wrong

First issuehellipPerpendicular guardrail is not proven crashworthybull No end treatmentsbull Violates ldquotaper raterdquo

requirements of SPI Part I (big time)

bull Requires shielding if within Clear Zone

Answerhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Any issue hereYES Wrong

Second issuehellipPerpendicular guardrail within the Approach Terminalrsquos clear area in the Standard Plans (where a clear 110 slope required)

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Any issue hereYES Wrong

Third issuehellipPerpendicular guardrail violates barrier setback per FDM Table 21542

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Solution 1

REMOVE theperpendicularGuardrail

Orhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Solution 2

1 Extend Guardrail to meet Length of Need per SPI Part B (Excel lsquoDesign Toolrsquo) which is Roadside Design Guide Eq 5-3

2 Meet minimum barrier setback per FDM Table 21542 (5 feet for general guardrail)

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Final Case StudyAssumptionsbull Design Speed

50 mph

bull Piers designed to withstand 600 kip impact load per FDM215454(Pier Protection Barrier notRequired)

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereAnswerhellip YES

First issuehellipPiers NOT shielded

ldquoLength of Needrdquo NOT met per SPI Part B (Excel Design Tool)

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereAnswerhellip YES

First issuehellipPiers NOT shielded

ldquoLength of Needrdquo NOT met per SPI Part B (Excel Design Tool)

Piers are behind the ldquogatingrdquo(break-away) portion of Approach Terminal

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereYES

Second issuehellipFlared Terminal usage on hold per RDB18-02

Regardlesshellip ldquoTaper Raterdquo too steep here at Approach Terminal (about 13 shown)

Guardrail requires 115 Max Taper Rate per SPI Part I

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereAnswerhellip YES

Third issuehellipldquoBarrier Setbackrdquo requirement likely not satisfied

per FDM Table 21542(5 feet or greater)hellip

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereYES

Fourth issuehellipldquoTrailing Anchoragerdquo not properly extended downstream of hazard

25-foot Requirement SPI C1 amp lsquoLONrsquo Design Tool (Excel)hellip

Answerhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereYES

Fourth issuehellipldquoTrailing Anchoragerdquo not properly extended downstream of hazard

25-foot Requirement SPI C1 amp lsquoLONrsquo Design Tool (Excel)hellip

AnswerhellipFrom lsquoLength of Needrsquo Excel Sheethellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Crash Cushion Index 544-001

Approach Terminals Solution 1lsquoCrash Cushionrsquobull ldquoSystem Widthrdquo ndash

lsquoWidersquo per SPI 544-001 Part C

bull ldquoLength Restrictionrdquo - per SPI 544-001 Part F

bull Contact Central Office for guidance

Note Define Crash Cushion with provided CADD cellhellipldquoSummary of Permanent Crash Cushions Tablerdquo

Guardrail Index 536-001 Crash Cushion Index 544-001

Approach Terminals Solution 1lsquoCrash Cushionrsquobull Guardrail ldquoreduced

post spacingrdquo to reduce required hazard setback per FDM Table 21542

bull Again contact Central Office for guidance for such limited space

Concrete Barrier Index 521-001 Crash Cushion 544-001

Approach Terminals Solution 2lsquoConcrete Barrierrsquo amp lsquoCrash Cushionrsquo

bull Requires project-specific design

bull Contact Central Office for guidance for such limited space

Questions

Richard Stepp PEStandard Plans Engineer

Central Office Roadway Design(850) 414-4313

richardsteppdotstateflus

Standard Plans Single-Slope Barriers

Page 33: Roadside Barriers - MASH Implementation Update & Design ... · Roadside Barriers - Lessons Learned 1. GUARDRAIL Standard Plans, Index 536-001 2. CONCRETE BARRIER Standard Plans, Index

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach TerminalsYES Wrong

First issuehellipFront slope break should be 6 feet behind guardrail face at post 1 per the Standards (110 Min)

Second issuehellipMisc Asphalt should extend 10 feet upstream of post 1 per Standards

Answerhellip

From Standard Planshellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach TerminalsYES Wrong

First issuehellipFront slope break should be 6 feet behind guardrail face at post 1 per the Standards (110 Min)

Second issuehellipMisc Asphalt should extend 10 feet upstream of post 1 per Standards

Answerhellip

Example of Poor Slope Break Location (and steep slope not shielded)

Photo Credit Bill Fitzgerald PE

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach TerminalsYES Wrong

First issuehellipFront slope break should be 6 feet behind guardrail face at post 1 per the Standards (110 Min)

Second issuehellipMisc Asphalt should extend 10 feet upstream of post 1 per Standards

Answerhellip

Example of Poor Grading (The reason for Misc Asphalt requirement)

Photo Credit Bill Fitzgerald PE

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals SolutionYES Wrong

First issuehellipFront slope break should be 6 feet behind guardrail face at post 1 per the Standards (110 Min)

Second issuehellipMisc Asphalt should extend 10 feet upstream of post 1 per Standards

Answerhellip

Correctedhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Any issues hereYES Wrong

First issuehellipTrees are within the Approach Terminalrsquos clear area in the Standard Plans (where a clear 110 slope required)

Second issuehellipTree violates barrier setback per FDM Table 21542

Answerhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Any issues hereYES Wrong

First issuehellipTrees are within the Approach Terminalrsquos clear area in the Standard Plans (where a clear 110 slope required)

Second issuehellipTree violates barrier setback per FDM Table 21542

Answerhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach TerminalsYES Wrong

First issuehellipTrees are within the Approach Terminalrsquos clear area in the Standard Plans (where a clear 110 slope required)

From Standard Planshellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals

CREDIT VIRGINIA DOT ndash SKT Crash Test Published October 2016

httpswwwyoutubecomwatchv=OsKlfatcjogampfeature=youtube

httpswwwyoutubecomwatchv=h7tct7Oo9-8ampfeature=youtube

YES Wrong

First issuehellipTrees are within the Approach Terminalrsquos clear area in the Standard Plans (where a clear 110 slope required)

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals

CREDIT VIRGINIA DOT ndash SKT Crash Test Published October 2016

httpswwwyoutubecomwatchv=74ImLTY-PhUampfeature=youtube

YES Wrong

First issuehellipTrees are within the Approach Terminalrsquos clear area in the Standard Plans (where a clear 110 slope required)

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach TerminalsYES Wrong

First issuehellipTrees are within the Approach Terminalrsquos clear area in the Standard Plans (where a clear 110 slope required)

From Standard Planshellip

Guardrail Index 536-001

YES Wrong

Second issuehellipTree violates barrier setback per FDM Table 21542

Guardrail Index 536-001

YES Wrong

Second issuehellipTree violates barrier setback per FDM Table 21542

From FDMhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Any issue hereYES Wrong

First issuehellipPerpendicular guardrail is not proven crashworthybull No end treatmentsbull Violates ldquotaper raterdquo

requirements of SPI Part I (big time)

bull Requires shielding if within Clear Zone

Answerhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Any issue hereYES Wrong

Second issuehellipPerpendicular guardrail within the Approach Terminalrsquos clear area in the Standard Plans (where a clear 110 slope required)

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Any issue hereYES Wrong

Third issuehellipPerpendicular guardrail violates barrier setback per FDM Table 21542

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Solution 1

REMOVE theperpendicularGuardrail

Orhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Solution 2

1 Extend Guardrail to meet Length of Need per SPI Part B (Excel lsquoDesign Toolrsquo) which is Roadside Design Guide Eq 5-3

2 Meet minimum barrier setback per FDM Table 21542 (5 feet for general guardrail)

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Final Case StudyAssumptionsbull Design Speed

50 mph

bull Piers designed to withstand 600 kip impact load per FDM215454(Pier Protection Barrier notRequired)

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereAnswerhellip YES

First issuehellipPiers NOT shielded

ldquoLength of Needrdquo NOT met per SPI Part B (Excel Design Tool)

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereAnswerhellip YES

First issuehellipPiers NOT shielded

ldquoLength of Needrdquo NOT met per SPI Part B (Excel Design Tool)

Piers are behind the ldquogatingrdquo(break-away) portion of Approach Terminal

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereYES

Second issuehellipFlared Terminal usage on hold per RDB18-02

Regardlesshellip ldquoTaper Raterdquo too steep here at Approach Terminal (about 13 shown)

Guardrail requires 115 Max Taper Rate per SPI Part I

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereAnswerhellip YES

Third issuehellipldquoBarrier Setbackrdquo requirement likely not satisfied

per FDM Table 21542(5 feet or greater)hellip

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereYES

Fourth issuehellipldquoTrailing Anchoragerdquo not properly extended downstream of hazard

25-foot Requirement SPI C1 amp lsquoLONrsquo Design Tool (Excel)hellip

Answerhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereYES

Fourth issuehellipldquoTrailing Anchoragerdquo not properly extended downstream of hazard

25-foot Requirement SPI C1 amp lsquoLONrsquo Design Tool (Excel)hellip

AnswerhellipFrom lsquoLength of Needrsquo Excel Sheethellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Crash Cushion Index 544-001

Approach Terminals Solution 1lsquoCrash Cushionrsquobull ldquoSystem Widthrdquo ndash

lsquoWidersquo per SPI 544-001 Part C

bull ldquoLength Restrictionrdquo - per SPI 544-001 Part F

bull Contact Central Office for guidance

Note Define Crash Cushion with provided CADD cellhellipldquoSummary of Permanent Crash Cushions Tablerdquo

Guardrail Index 536-001 Crash Cushion Index 544-001

Approach Terminals Solution 1lsquoCrash Cushionrsquobull Guardrail ldquoreduced

post spacingrdquo to reduce required hazard setback per FDM Table 21542

bull Again contact Central Office for guidance for such limited space

Concrete Barrier Index 521-001 Crash Cushion 544-001

Approach Terminals Solution 2lsquoConcrete Barrierrsquo amp lsquoCrash Cushionrsquo

bull Requires project-specific design

bull Contact Central Office for guidance for such limited space

Questions

Richard Stepp PEStandard Plans Engineer

Central Office Roadway Design(850) 414-4313

richardsteppdotstateflus

Standard Plans Single-Slope Barriers

Page 34: Roadside Barriers - MASH Implementation Update & Design ... · Roadside Barriers - Lessons Learned 1. GUARDRAIL Standard Plans, Index 536-001 2. CONCRETE BARRIER Standard Plans, Index

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach TerminalsYES Wrong

First issuehellipFront slope break should be 6 feet behind guardrail face at post 1 per the Standards (110 Min)

Second issuehellipMisc Asphalt should extend 10 feet upstream of post 1 per Standards

Answerhellip

Example of Poor Slope Break Location (and steep slope not shielded)

Photo Credit Bill Fitzgerald PE

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach TerminalsYES Wrong

First issuehellipFront slope break should be 6 feet behind guardrail face at post 1 per the Standards (110 Min)

Second issuehellipMisc Asphalt should extend 10 feet upstream of post 1 per Standards

Answerhellip

Example of Poor Grading (The reason for Misc Asphalt requirement)

Photo Credit Bill Fitzgerald PE

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals SolutionYES Wrong

First issuehellipFront slope break should be 6 feet behind guardrail face at post 1 per the Standards (110 Min)

Second issuehellipMisc Asphalt should extend 10 feet upstream of post 1 per Standards

Answerhellip

Correctedhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Any issues hereYES Wrong

First issuehellipTrees are within the Approach Terminalrsquos clear area in the Standard Plans (where a clear 110 slope required)

Second issuehellipTree violates barrier setback per FDM Table 21542

Answerhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Any issues hereYES Wrong

First issuehellipTrees are within the Approach Terminalrsquos clear area in the Standard Plans (where a clear 110 slope required)

Second issuehellipTree violates barrier setback per FDM Table 21542

Answerhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach TerminalsYES Wrong

First issuehellipTrees are within the Approach Terminalrsquos clear area in the Standard Plans (where a clear 110 slope required)

From Standard Planshellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals

CREDIT VIRGINIA DOT ndash SKT Crash Test Published October 2016

httpswwwyoutubecomwatchv=OsKlfatcjogampfeature=youtube

httpswwwyoutubecomwatchv=h7tct7Oo9-8ampfeature=youtube

YES Wrong

First issuehellipTrees are within the Approach Terminalrsquos clear area in the Standard Plans (where a clear 110 slope required)

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals

CREDIT VIRGINIA DOT ndash SKT Crash Test Published October 2016

httpswwwyoutubecomwatchv=74ImLTY-PhUampfeature=youtube

YES Wrong

First issuehellipTrees are within the Approach Terminalrsquos clear area in the Standard Plans (where a clear 110 slope required)

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach TerminalsYES Wrong

First issuehellipTrees are within the Approach Terminalrsquos clear area in the Standard Plans (where a clear 110 slope required)

From Standard Planshellip

Guardrail Index 536-001

YES Wrong

Second issuehellipTree violates barrier setback per FDM Table 21542

Guardrail Index 536-001

YES Wrong

Second issuehellipTree violates barrier setback per FDM Table 21542

From FDMhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Any issue hereYES Wrong

First issuehellipPerpendicular guardrail is not proven crashworthybull No end treatmentsbull Violates ldquotaper raterdquo

requirements of SPI Part I (big time)

bull Requires shielding if within Clear Zone

Answerhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Any issue hereYES Wrong

Second issuehellipPerpendicular guardrail within the Approach Terminalrsquos clear area in the Standard Plans (where a clear 110 slope required)

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Any issue hereYES Wrong

Third issuehellipPerpendicular guardrail violates barrier setback per FDM Table 21542

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Solution 1

REMOVE theperpendicularGuardrail

Orhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Solution 2

1 Extend Guardrail to meet Length of Need per SPI Part B (Excel lsquoDesign Toolrsquo) which is Roadside Design Guide Eq 5-3

2 Meet minimum barrier setback per FDM Table 21542 (5 feet for general guardrail)

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Final Case StudyAssumptionsbull Design Speed

50 mph

bull Piers designed to withstand 600 kip impact load per FDM215454(Pier Protection Barrier notRequired)

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereAnswerhellip YES

First issuehellipPiers NOT shielded

ldquoLength of Needrdquo NOT met per SPI Part B (Excel Design Tool)

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereAnswerhellip YES

First issuehellipPiers NOT shielded

ldquoLength of Needrdquo NOT met per SPI Part B (Excel Design Tool)

Piers are behind the ldquogatingrdquo(break-away) portion of Approach Terminal

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereYES

Second issuehellipFlared Terminal usage on hold per RDB18-02

Regardlesshellip ldquoTaper Raterdquo too steep here at Approach Terminal (about 13 shown)

Guardrail requires 115 Max Taper Rate per SPI Part I

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereAnswerhellip YES

Third issuehellipldquoBarrier Setbackrdquo requirement likely not satisfied

per FDM Table 21542(5 feet or greater)hellip

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereYES

Fourth issuehellipldquoTrailing Anchoragerdquo not properly extended downstream of hazard

25-foot Requirement SPI C1 amp lsquoLONrsquo Design Tool (Excel)hellip

Answerhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereYES

Fourth issuehellipldquoTrailing Anchoragerdquo not properly extended downstream of hazard

25-foot Requirement SPI C1 amp lsquoLONrsquo Design Tool (Excel)hellip

AnswerhellipFrom lsquoLength of Needrsquo Excel Sheethellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Crash Cushion Index 544-001

Approach Terminals Solution 1lsquoCrash Cushionrsquobull ldquoSystem Widthrdquo ndash

lsquoWidersquo per SPI 544-001 Part C

bull ldquoLength Restrictionrdquo - per SPI 544-001 Part F

bull Contact Central Office for guidance

Note Define Crash Cushion with provided CADD cellhellipldquoSummary of Permanent Crash Cushions Tablerdquo

Guardrail Index 536-001 Crash Cushion Index 544-001

Approach Terminals Solution 1lsquoCrash Cushionrsquobull Guardrail ldquoreduced

post spacingrdquo to reduce required hazard setback per FDM Table 21542

bull Again contact Central Office for guidance for such limited space

Concrete Barrier Index 521-001 Crash Cushion 544-001

Approach Terminals Solution 2lsquoConcrete Barrierrsquo amp lsquoCrash Cushionrsquo

bull Requires project-specific design

bull Contact Central Office for guidance for such limited space

Questions

Richard Stepp PEStandard Plans Engineer

Central Office Roadway Design(850) 414-4313

richardsteppdotstateflus

Standard Plans Single-Slope Barriers

Page 35: Roadside Barriers - MASH Implementation Update & Design ... · Roadside Barriers - Lessons Learned 1. GUARDRAIL Standard Plans, Index 536-001 2. CONCRETE BARRIER Standard Plans, Index

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach TerminalsYES Wrong

First issuehellipFront slope break should be 6 feet behind guardrail face at post 1 per the Standards (110 Min)

Second issuehellipMisc Asphalt should extend 10 feet upstream of post 1 per Standards

Answerhellip

Example of Poor Grading (The reason for Misc Asphalt requirement)

Photo Credit Bill Fitzgerald PE

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals SolutionYES Wrong

First issuehellipFront slope break should be 6 feet behind guardrail face at post 1 per the Standards (110 Min)

Second issuehellipMisc Asphalt should extend 10 feet upstream of post 1 per Standards

Answerhellip

Correctedhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Any issues hereYES Wrong

First issuehellipTrees are within the Approach Terminalrsquos clear area in the Standard Plans (where a clear 110 slope required)

Second issuehellipTree violates barrier setback per FDM Table 21542

Answerhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Any issues hereYES Wrong

First issuehellipTrees are within the Approach Terminalrsquos clear area in the Standard Plans (where a clear 110 slope required)

Second issuehellipTree violates barrier setback per FDM Table 21542

Answerhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach TerminalsYES Wrong

First issuehellipTrees are within the Approach Terminalrsquos clear area in the Standard Plans (where a clear 110 slope required)

From Standard Planshellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals

CREDIT VIRGINIA DOT ndash SKT Crash Test Published October 2016

httpswwwyoutubecomwatchv=OsKlfatcjogampfeature=youtube

httpswwwyoutubecomwatchv=h7tct7Oo9-8ampfeature=youtube

YES Wrong

First issuehellipTrees are within the Approach Terminalrsquos clear area in the Standard Plans (where a clear 110 slope required)

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals

CREDIT VIRGINIA DOT ndash SKT Crash Test Published October 2016

httpswwwyoutubecomwatchv=74ImLTY-PhUampfeature=youtube

YES Wrong

First issuehellipTrees are within the Approach Terminalrsquos clear area in the Standard Plans (where a clear 110 slope required)

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach TerminalsYES Wrong

First issuehellipTrees are within the Approach Terminalrsquos clear area in the Standard Plans (where a clear 110 slope required)

From Standard Planshellip

Guardrail Index 536-001

YES Wrong

Second issuehellipTree violates barrier setback per FDM Table 21542

Guardrail Index 536-001

YES Wrong

Second issuehellipTree violates barrier setback per FDM Table 21542

From FDMhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Any issue hereYES Wrong

First issuehellipPerpendicular guardrail is not proven crashworthybull No end treatmentsbull Violates ldquotaper raterdquo

requirements of SPI Part I (big time)

bull Requires shielding if within Clear Zone

Answerhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Any issue hereYES Wrong

Second issuehellipPerpendicular guardrail within the Approach Terminalrsquos clear area in the Standard Plans (where a clear 110 slope required)

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Any issue hereYES Wrong

Third issuehellipPerpendicular guardrail violates barrier setback per FDM Table 21542

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Solution 1

REMOVE theperpendicularGuardrail

Orhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Solution 2

1 Extend Guardrail to meet Length of Need per SPI Part B (Excel lsquoDesign Toolrsquo) which is Roadside Design Guide Eq 5-3

2 Meet minimum barrier setback per FDM Table 21542 (5 feet for general guardrail)

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Final Case StudyAssumptionsbull Design Speed

50 mph

bull Piers designed to withstand 600 kip impact load per FDM215454(Pier Protection Barrier notRequired)

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereAnswerhellip YES

First issuehellipPiers NOT shielded

ldquoLength of Needrdquo NOT met per SPI Part B (Excel Design Tool)

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereAnswerhellip YES

First issuehellipPiers NOT shielded

ldquoLength of Needrdquo NOT met per SPI Part B (Excel Design Tool)

Piers are behind the ldquogatingrdquo(break-away) portion of Approach Terminal

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereYES

Second issuehellipFlared Terminal usage on hold per RDB18-02

Regardlesshellip ldquoTaper Raterdquo too steep here at Approach Terminal (about 13 shown)

Guardrail requires 115 Max Taper Rate per SPI Part I

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereAnswerhellip YES

Third issuehellipldquoBarrier Setbackrdquo requirement likely not satisfied

per FDM Table 21542(5 feet or greater)hellip

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereYES

Fourth issuehellipldquoTrailing Anchoragerdquo not properly extended downstream of hazard

25-foot Requirement SPI C1 amp lsquoLONrsquo Design Tool (Excel)hellip

Answerhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereYES

Fourth issuehellipldquoTrailing Anchoragerdquo not properly extended downstream of hazard

25-foot Requirement SPI C1 amp lsquoLONrsquo Design Tool (Excel)hellip

AnswerhellipFrom lsquoLength of Needrsquo Excel Sheethellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Crash Cushion Index 544-001

Approach Terminals Solution 1lsquoCrash Cushionrsquobull ldquoSystem Widthrdquo ndash

lsquoWidersquo per SPI 544-001 Part C

bull ldquoLength Restrictionrdquo - per SPI 544-001 Part F

bull Contact Central Office for guidance

Note Define Crash Cushion with provided CADD cellhellipldquoSummary of Permanent Crash Cushions Tablerdquo

Guardrail Index 536-001 Crash Cushion Index 544-001

Approach Terminals Solution 1lsquoCrash Cushionrsquobull Guardrail ldquoreduced

post spacingrdquo to reduce required hazard setback per FDM Table 21542

bull Again contact Central Office for guidance for such limited space

Concrete Barrier Index 521-001 Crash Cushion 544-001

Approach Terminals Solution 2lsquoConcrete Barrierrsquo amp lsquoCrash Cushionrsquo

bull Requires project-specific design

bull Contact Central Office for guidance for such limited space

Questions

Richard Stepp PEStandard Plans Engineer

Central Office Roadway Design(850) 414-4313

richardsteppdotstateflus

Standard Plans Single-Slope Barriers

Page 36: Roadside Barriers - MASH Implementation Update & Design ... · Roadside Barriers - Lessons Learned 1. GUARDRAIL Standard Plans, Index 536-001 2. CONCRETE BARRIER Standard Plans, Index

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals SolutionYES Wrong

First issuehellipFront slope break should be 6 feet behind guardrail face at post 1 per the Standards (110 Min)

Second issuehellipMisc Asphalt should extend 10 feet upstream of post 1 per Standards

Answerhellip

Correctedhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Any issues hereYES Wrong

First issuehellipTrees are within the Approach Terminalrsquos clear area in the Standard Plans (where a clear 110 slope required)

Second issuehellipTree violates barrier setback per FDM Table 21542

Answerhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Any issues hereYES Wrong

First issuehellipTrees are within the Approach Terminalrsquos clear area in the Standard Plans (where a clear 110 slope required)

Second issuehellipTree violates barrier setback per FDM Table 21542

Answerhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach TerminalsYES Wrong

First issuehellipTrees are within the Approach Terminalrsquos clear area in the Standard Plans (where a clear 110 slope required)

From Standard Planshellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals

CREDIT VIRGINIA DOT ndash SKT Crash Test Published October 2016

httpswwwyoutubecomwatchv=OsKlfatcjogampfeature=youtube

httpswwwyoutubecomwatchv=h7tct7Oo9-8ampfeature=youtube

YES Wrong

First issuehellipTrees are within the Approach Terminalrsquos clear area in the Standard Plans (where a clear 110 slope required)

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals

CREDIT VIRGINIA DOT ndash SKT Crash Test Published October 2016

httpswwwyoutubecomwatchv=74ImLTY-PhUampfeature=youtube

YES Wrong

First issuehellipTrees are within the Approach Terminalrsquos clear area in the Standard Plans (where a clear 110 slope required)

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach TerminalsYES Wrong

First issuehellipTrees are within the Approach Terminalrsquos clear area in the Standard Plans (where a clear 110 slope required)

From Standard Planshellip

Guardrail Index 536-001

YES Wrong

Second issuehellipTree violates barrier setback per FDM Table 21542

Guardrail Index 536-001

YES Wrong

Second issuehellipTree violates barrier setback per FDM Table 21542

From FDMhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Any issue hereYES Wrong

First issuehellipPerpendicular guardrail is not proven crashworthybull No end treatmentsbull Violates ldquotaper raterdquo

requirements of SPI Part I (big time)

bull Requires shielding if within Clear Zone

Answerhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Any issue hereYES Wrong

Second issuehellipPerpendicular guardrail within the Approach Terminalrsquos clear area in the Standard Plans (where a clear 110 slope required)

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Any issue hereYES Wrong

Third issuehellipPerpendicular guardrail violates barrier setback per FDM Table 21542

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Solution 1

REMOVE theperpendicularGuardrail

Orhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Solution 2

1 Extend Guardrail to meet Length of Need per SPI Part B (Excel lsquoDesign Toolrsquo) which is Roadside Design Guide Eq 5-3

2 Meet minimum barrier setback per FDM Table 21542 (5 feet for general guardrail)

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Final Case StudyAssumptionsbull Design Speed

50 mph

bull Piers designed to withstand 600 kip impact load per FDM215454(Pier Protection Barrier notRequired)

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereAnswerhellip YES

First issuehellipPiers NOT shielded

ldquoLength of Needrdquo NOT met per SPI Part B (Excel Design Tool)

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereAnswerhellip YES

First issuehellipPiers NOT shielded

ldquoLength of Needrdquo NOT met per SPI Part B (Excel Design Tool)

Piers are behind the ldquogatingrdquo(break-away) portion of Approach Terminal

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereYES

Second issuehellipFlared Terminal usage on hold per RDB18-02

Regardlesshellip ldquoTaper Raterdquo too steep here at Approach Terminal (about 13 shown)

Guardrail requires 115 Max Taper Rate per SPI Part I

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereAnswerhellip YES

Third issuehellipldquoBarrier Setbackrdquo requirement likely not satisfied

per FDM Table 21542(5 feet or greater)hellip

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereYES

Fourth issuehellipldquoTrailing Anchoragerdquo not properly extended downstream of hazard

25-foot Requirement SPI C1 amp lsquoLONrsquo Design Tool (Excel)hellip

Answerhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereYES

Fourth issuehellipldquoTrailing Anchoragerdquo not properly extended downstream of hazard

25-foot Requirement SPI C1 amp lsquoLONrsquo Design Tool (Excel)hellip

AnswerhellipFrom lsquoLength of Needrsquo Excel Sheethellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Crash Cushion Index 544-001

Approach Terminals Solution 1lsquoCrash Cushionrsquobull ldquoSystem Widthrdquo ndash

lsquoWidersquo per SPI 544-001 Part C

bull ldquoLength Restrictionrdquo - per SPI 544-001 Part F

bull Contact Central Office for guidance

Note Define Crash Cushion with provided CADD cellhellipldquoSummary of Permanent Crash Cushions Tablerdquo

Guardrail Index 536-001 Crash Cushion Index 544-001

Approach Terminals Solution 1lsquoCrash Cushionrsquobull Guardrail ldquoreduced

post spacingrdquo to reduce required hazard setback per FDM Table 21542

bull Again contact Central Office for guidance for such limited space

Concrete Barrier Index 521-001 Crash Cushion 544-001

Approach Terminals Solution 2lsquoConcrete Barrierrsquo amp lsquoCrash Cushionrsquo

bull Requires project-specific design

bull Contact Central Office for guidance for such limited space

Questions

Richard Stepp PEStandard Plans Engineer

Central Office Roadway Design(850) 414-4313

richardsteppdotstateflus

Standard Plans Single-Slope Barriers

Page 37: Roadside Barriers - MASH Implementation Update & Design ... · Roadside Barriers - Lessons Learned 1. GUARDRAIL Standard Plans, Index 536-001 2. CONCRETE BARRIER Standard Plans, Index

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Any issues hereYES Wrong

First issuehellipTrees are within the Approach Terminalrsquos clear area in the Standard Plans (where a clear 110 slope required)

Second issuehellipTree violates barrier setback per FDM Table 21542

Answerhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Any issues hereYES Wrong

First issuehellipTrees are within the Approach Terminalrsquos clear area in the Standard Plans (where a clear 110 slope required)

Second issuehellipTree violates barrier setback per FDM Table 21542

Answerhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach TerminalsYES Wrong

First issuehellipTrees are within the Approach Terminalrsquos clear area in the Standard Plans (where a clear 110 slope required)

From Standard Planshellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals

CREDIT VIRGINIA DOT ndash SKT Crash Test Published October 2016

httpswwwyoutubecomwatchv=OsKlfatcjogampfeature=youtube

httpswwwyoutubecomwatchv=h7tct7Oo9-8ampfeature=youtube

YES Wrong

First issuehellipTrees are within the Approach Terminalrsquos clear area in the Standard Plans (where a clear 110 slope required)

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals

CREDIT VIRGINIA DOT ndash SKT Crash Test Published October 2016

httpswwwyoutubecomwatchv=74ImLTY-PhUampfeature=youtube

YES Wrong

First issuehellipTrees are within the Approach Terminalrsquos clear area in the Standard Plans (where a clear 110 slope required)

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach TerminalsYES Wrong

First issuehellipTrees are within the Approach Terminalrsquos clear area in the Standard Plans (where a clear 110 slope required)

From Standard Planshellip

Guardrail Index 536-001

YES Wrong

Second issuehellipTree violates barrier setback per FDM Table 21542

Guardrail Index 536-001

YES Wrong

Second issuehellipTree violates barrier setback per FDM Table 21542

From FDMhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Any issue hereYES Wrong

First issuehellipPerpendicular guardrail is not proven crashworthybull No end treatmentsbull Violates ldquotaper raterdquo

requirements of SPI Part I (big time)

bull Requires shielding if within Clear Zone

Answerhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Any issue hereYES Wrong

Second issuehellipPerpendicular guardrail within the Approach Terminalrsquos clear area in the Standard Plans (where a clear 110 slope required)

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Any issue hereYES Wrong

Third issuehellipPerpendicular guardrail violates barrier setback per FDM Table 21542

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Solution 1

REMOVE theperpendicularGuardrail

Orhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Solution 2

1 Extend Guardrail to meet Length of Need per SPI Part B (Excel lsquoDesign Toolrsquo) which is Roadside Design Guide Eq 5-3

2 Meet minimum barrier setback per FDM Table 21542 (5 feet for general guardrail)

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Final Case StudyAssumptionsbull Design Speed

50 mph

bull Piers designed to withstand 600 kip impact load per FDM215454(Pier Protection Barrier notRequired)

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereAnswerhellip YES

First issuehellipPiers NOT shielded

ldquoLength of Needrdquo NOT met per SPI Part B (Excel Design Tool)

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereAnswerhellip YES

First issuehellipPiers NOT shielded

ldquoLength of Needrdquo NOT met per SPI Part B (Excel Design Tool)

Piers are behind the ldquogatingrdquo(break-away) portion of Approach Terminal

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereYES

Second issuehellipFlared Terminal usage on hold per RDB18-02

Regardlesshellip ldquoTaper Raterdquo too steep here at Approach Terminal (about 13 shown)

Guardrail requires 115 Max Taper Rate per SPI Part I

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereAnswerhellip YES

Third issuehellipldquoBarrier Setbackrdquo requirement likely not satisfied

per FDM Table 21542(5 feet or greater)hellip

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereYES

Fourth issuehellipldquoTrailing Anchoragerdquo not properly extended downstream of hazard

25-foot Requirement SPI C1 amp lsquoLONrsquo Design Tool (Excel)hellip

Answerhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereYES

Fourth issuehellipldquoTrailing Anchoragerdquo not properly extended downstream of hazard

25-foot Requirement SPI C1 amp lsquoLONrsquo Design Tool (Excel)hellip

AnswerhellipFrom lsquoLength of Needrsquo Excel Sheethellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Crash Cushion Index 544-001

Approach Terminals Solution 1lsquoCrash Cushionrsquobull ldquoSystem Widthrdquo ndash

lsquoWidersquo per SPI 544-001 Part C

bull ldquoLength Restrictionrdquo - per SPI 544-001 Part F

bull Contact Central Office for guidance

Note Define Crash Cushion with provided CADD cellhellipldquoSummary of Permanent Crash Cushions Tablerdquo

Guardrail Index 536-001 Crash Cushion Index 544-001

Approach Terminals Solution 1lsquoCrash Cushionrsquobull Guardrail ldquoreduced

post spacingrdquo to reduce required hazard setback per FDM Table 21542

bull Again contact Central Office for guidance for such limited space

Concrete Barrier Index 521-001 Crash Cushion 544-001

Approach Terminals Solution 2lsquoConcrete Barrierrsquo amp lsquoCrash Cushionrsquo

bull Requires project-specific design

bull Contact Central Office for guidance for such limited space

Questions

Richard Stepp PEStandard Plans Engineer

Central Office Roadway Design(850) 414-4313

richardsteppdotstateflus

Standard Plans Single-Slope Barriers

Page 38: Roadside Barriers - MASH Implementation Update & Design ... · Roadside Barriers - Lessons Learned 1. GUARDRAIL Standard Plans, Index 536-001 2. CONCRETE BARRIER Standard Plans, Index

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Any issues hereYES Wrong

First issuehellipTrees are within the Approach Terminalrsquos clear area in the Standard Plans (where a clear 110 slope required)

Second issuehellipTree violates barrier setback per FDM Table 21542

Answerhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach TerminalsYES Wrong

First issuehellipTrees are within the Approach Terminalrsquos clear area in the Standard Plans (where a clear 110 slope required)

From Standard Planshellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals

CREDIT VIRGINIA DOT ndash SKT Crash Test Published October 2016

httpswwwyoutubecomwatchv=OsKlfatcjogampfeature=youtube

httpswwwyoutubecomwatchv=h7tct7Oo9-8ampfeature=youtube

YES Wrong

First issuehellipTrees are within the Approach Terminalrsquos clear area in the Standard Plans (where a clear 110 slope required)

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals

CREDIT VIRGINIA DOT ndash SKT Crash Test Published October 2016

httpswwwyoutubecomwatchv=74ImLTY-PhUampfeature=youtube

YES Wrong

First issuehellipTrees are within the Approach Terminalrsquos clear area in the Standard Plans (where a clear 110 slope required)

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach TerminalsYES Wrong

First issuehellipTrees are within the Approach Terminalrsquos clear area in the Standard Plans (where a clear 110 slope required)

From Standard Planshellip

Guardrail Index 536-001

YES Wrong

Second issuehellipTree violates barrier setback per FDM Table 21542

Guardrail Index 536-001

YES Wrong

Second issuehellipTree violates barrier setback per FDM Table 21542

From FDMhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Any issue hereYES Wrong

First issuehellipPerpendicular guardrail is not proven crashworthybull No end treatmentsbull Violates ldquotaper raterdquo

requirements of SPI Part I (big time)

bull Requires shielding if within Clear Zone

Answerhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Any issue hereYES Wrong

Second issuehellipPerpendicular guardrail within the Approach Terminalrsquos clear area in the Standard Plans (where a clear 110 slope required)

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Any issue hereYES Wrong

Third issuehellipPerpendicular guardrail violates barrier setback per FDM Table 21542

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Solution 1

REMOVE theperpendicularGuardrail

Orhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Solution 2

1 Extend Guardrail to meet Length of Need per SPI Part B (Excel lsquoDesign Toolrsquo) which is Roadside Design Guide Eq 5-3

2 Meet minimum barrier setback per FDM Table 21542 (5 feet for general guardrail)

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Final Case StudyAssumptionsbull Design Speed

50 mph

bull Piers designed to withstand 600 kip impact load per FDM215454(Pier Protection Barrier notRequired)

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereAnswerhellip YES

First issuehellipPiers NOT shielded

ldquoLength of Needrdquo NOT met per SPI Part B (Excel Design Tool)

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereAnswerhellip YES

First issuehellipPiers NOT shielded

ldquoLength of Needrdquo NOT met per SPI Part B (Excel Design Tool)

Piers are behind the ldquogatingrdquo(break-away) portion of Approach Terminal

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereYES

Second issuehellipFlared Terminal usage on hold per RDB18-02

Regardlesshellip ldquoTaper Raterdquo too steep here at Approach Terminal (about 13 shown)

Guardrail requires 115 Max Taper Rate per SPI Part I

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereAnswerhellip YES

Third issuehellipldquoBarrier Setbackrdquo requirement likely not satisfied

per FDM Table 21542(5 feet or greater)hellip

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereYES

Fourth issuehellipldquoTrailing Anchoragerdquo not properly extended downstream of hazard

25-foot Requirement SPI C1 amp lsquoLONrsquo Design Tool (Excel)hellip

Answerhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereYES

Fourth issuehellipldquoTrailing Anchoragerdquo not properly extended downstream of hazard

25-foot Requirement SPI C1 amp lsquoLONrsquo Design Tool (Excel)hellip

AnswerhellipFrom lsquoLength of Needrsquo Excel Sheethellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Crash Cushion Index 544-001

Approach Terminals Solution 1lsquoCrash Cushionrsquobull ldquoSystem Widthrdquo ndash

lsquoWidersquo per SPI 544-001 Part C

bull ldquoLength Restrictionrdquo - per SPI 544-001 Part F

bull Contact Central Office for guidance

Note Define Crash Cushion with provided CADD cellhellipldquoSummary of Permanent Crash Cushions Tablerdquo

Guardrail Index 536-001 Crash Cushion Index 544-001

Approach Terminals Solution 1lsquoCrash Cushionrsquobull Guardrail ldquoreduced

post spacingrdquo to reduce required hazard setback per FDM Table 21542

bull Again contact Central Office for guidance for such limited space

Concrete Barrier Index 521-001 Crash Cushion 544-001

Approach Terminals Solution 2lsquoConcrete Barrierrsquo amp lsquoCrash Cushionrsquo

bull Requires project-specific design

bull Contact Central Office for guidance for such limited space

Questions

Richard Stepp PEStandard Plans Engineer

Central Office Roadway Design(850) 414-4313

richardsteppdotstateflus

Standard Plans Single-Slope Barriers

Page 39: Roadside Barriers - MASH Implementation Update & Design ... · Roadside Barriers - Lessons Learned 1. GUARDRAIL Standard Plans, Index 536-001 2. CONCRETE BARRIER Standard Plans, Index

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach TerminalsYES Wrong

First issuehellipTrees are within the Approach Terminalrsquos clear area in the Standard Plans (where a clear 110 slope required)

From Standard Planshellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals

CREDIT VIRGINIA DOT ndash SKT Crash Test Published October 2016

httpswwwyoutubecomwatchv=OsKlfatcjogampfeature=youtube

httpswwwyoutubecomwatchv=h7tct7Oo9-8ampfeature=youtube

YES Wrong

First issuehellipTrees are within the Approach Terminalrsquos clear area in the Standard Plans (where a clear 110 slope required)

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals

CREDIT VIRGINIA DOT ndash SKT Crash Test Published October 2016

httpswwwyoutubecomwatchv=74ImLTY-PhUampfeature=youtube

YES Wrong

First issuehellipTrees are within the Approach Terminalrsquos clear area in the Standard Plans (where a clear 110 slope required)

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach TerminalsYES Wrong

First issuehellipTrees are within the Approach Terminalrsquos clear area in the Standard Plans (where a clear 110 slope required)

From Standard Planshellip

Guardrail Index 536-001

YES Wrong

Second issuehellipTree violates barrier setback per FDM Table 21542

Guardrail Index 536-001

YES Wrong

Second issuehellipTree violates barrier setback per FDM Table 21542

From FDMhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Any issue hereYES Wrong

First issuehellipPerpendicular guardrail is not proven crashworthybull No end treatmentsbull Violates ldquotaper raterdquo

requirements of SPI Part I (big time)

bull Requires shielding if within Clear Zone

Answerhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Any issue hereYES Wrong

Second issuehellipPerpendicular guardrail within the Approach Terminalrsquos clear area in the Standard Plans (where a clear 110 slope required)

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Any issue hereYES Wrong

Third issuehellipPerpendicular guardrail violates barrier setback per FDM Table 21542

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Solution 1

REMOVE theperpendicularGuardrail

Orhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Solution 2

1 Extend Guardrail to meet Length of Need per SPI Part B (Excel lsquoDesign Toolrsquo) which is Roadside Design Guide Eq 5-3

2 Meet minimum barrier setback per FDM Table 21542 (5 feet for general guardrail)

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Final Case StudyAssumptionsbull Design Speed

50 mph

bull Piers designed to withstand 600 kip impact load per FDM215454(Pier Protection Barrier notRequired)

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereAnswerhellip YES

First issuehellipPiers NOT shielded

ldquoLength of Needrdquo NOT met per SPI Part B (Excel Design Tool)

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereAnswerhellip YES

First issuehellipPiers NOT shielded

ldquoLength of Needrdquo NOT met per SPI Part B (Excel Design Tool)

Piers are behind the ldquogatingrdquo(break-away) portion of Approach Terminal

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereYES

Second issuehellipFlared Terminal usage on hold per RDB18-02

Regardlesshellip ldquoTaper Raterdquo too steep here at Approach Terminal (about 13 shown)

Guardrail requires 115 Max Taper Rate per SPI Part I

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereAnswerhellip YES

Third issuehellipldquoBarrier Setbackrdquo requirement likely not satisfied

per FDM Table 21542(5 feet or greater)hellip

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereYES

Fourth issuehellipldquoTrailing Anchoragerdquo not properly extended downstream of hazard

25-foot Requirement SPI C1 amp lsquoLONrsquo Design Tool (Excel)hellip

Answerhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereYES

Fourth issuehellipldquoTrailing Anchoragerdquo not properly extended downstream of hazard

25-foot Requirement SPI C1 amp lsquoLONrsquo Design Tool (Excel)hellip

AnswerhellipFrom lsquoLength of Needrsquo Excel Sheethellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Crash Cushion Index 544-001

Approach Terminals Solution 1lsquoCrash Cushionrsquobull ldquoSystem Widthrdquo ndash

lsquoWidersquo per SPI 544-001 Part C

bull ldquoLength Restrictionrdquo - per SPI 544-001 Part F

bull Contact Central Office for guidance

Note Define Crash Cushion with provided CADD cellhellipldquoSummary of Permanent Crash Cushions Tablerdquo

Guardrail Index 536-001 Crash Cushion Index 544-001

Approach Terminals Solution 1lsquoCrash Cushionrsquobull Guardrail ldquoreduced

post spacingrdquo to reduce required hazard setback per FDM Table 21542

bull Again contact Central Office for guidance for such limited space

Concrete Barrier Index 521-001 Crash Cushion 544-001

Approach Terminals Solution 2lsquoConcrete Barrierrsquo amp lsquoCrash Cushionrsquo

bull Requires project-specific design

bull Contact Central Office for guidance for such limited space

Questions

Richard Stepp PEStandard Plans Engineer

Central Office Roadway Design(850) 414-4313

richardsteppdotstateflus

Standard Plans Single-Slope Barriers

Page 40: Roadside Barriers - MASH Implementation Update & Design ... · Roadside Barriers - Lessons Learned 1. GUARDRAIL Standard Plans, Index 536-001 2. CONCRETE BARRIER Standard Plans, Index

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals

CREDIT VIRGINIA DOT ndash SKT Crash Test Published October 2016

httpswwwyoutubecomwatchv=OsKlfatcjogampfeature=youtube

httpswwwyoutubecomwatchv=h7tct7Oo9-8ampfeature=youtube

YES Wrong

First issuehellipTrees are within the Approach Terminalrsquos clear area in the Standard Plans (where a clear 110 slope required)

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals

CREDIT VIRGINIA DOT ndash SKT Crash Test Published October 2016

httpswwwyoutubecomwatchv=74ImLTY-PhUampfeature=youtube

YES Wrong

First issuehellipTrees are within the Approach Terminalrsquos clear area in the Standard Plans (where a clear 110 slope required)

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach TerminalsYES Wrong

First issuehellipTrees are within the Approach Terminalrsquos clear area in the Standard Plans (where a clear 110 slope required)

From Standard Planshellip

Guardrail Index 536-001

YES Wrong

Second issuehellipTree violates barrier setback per FDM Table 21542

Guardrail Index 536-001

YES Wrong

Second issuehellipTree violates barrier setback per FDM Table 21542

From FDMhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Any issue hereYES Wrong

First issuehellipPerpendicular guardrail is not proven crashworthybull No end treatmentsbull Violates ldquotaper raterdquo

requirements of SPI Part I (big time)

bull Requires shielding if within Clear Zone

Answerhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Any issue hereYES Wrong

Second issuehellipPerpendicular guardrail within the Approach Terminalrsquos clear area in the Standard Plans (where a clear 110 slope required)

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Any issue hereYES Wrong

Third issuehellipPerpendicular guardrail violates barrier setback per FDM Table 21542

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Solution 1

REMOVE theperpendicularGuardrail

Orhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Solution 2

1 Extend Guardrail to meet Length of Need per SPI Part B (Excel lsquoDesign Toolrsquo) which is Roadside Design Guide Eq 5-3

2 Meet minimum barrier setback per FDM Table 21542 (5 feet for general guardrail)

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Final Case StudyAssumptionsbull Design Speed

50 mph

bull Piers designed to withstand 600 kip impact load per FDM215454(Pier Protection Barrier notRequired)

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereAnswerhellip YES

First issuehellipPiers NOT shielded

ldquoLength of Needrdquo NOT met per SPI Part B (Excel Design Tool)

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereAnswerhellip YES

First issuehellipPiers NOT shielded

ldquoLength of Needrdquo NOT met per SPI Part B (Excel Design Tool)

Piers are behind the ldquogatingrdquo(break-away) portion of Approach Terminal

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereYES

Second issuehellipFlared Terminal usage on hold per RDB18-02

Regardlesshellip ldquoTaper Raterdquo too steep here at Approach Terminal (about 13 shown)

Guardrail requires 115 Max Taper Rate per SPI Part I

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereAnswerhellip YES

Third issuehellipldquoBarrier Setbackrdquo requirement likely not satisfied

per FDM Table 21542(5 feet or greater)hellip

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereYES

Fourth issuehellipldquoTrailing Anchoragerdquo not properly extended downstream of hazard

25-foot Requirement SPI C1 amp lsquoLONrsquo Design Tool (Excel)hellip

Answerhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereYES

Fourth issuehellipldquoTrailing Anchoragerdquo not properly extended downstream of hazard

25-foot Requirement SPI C1 amp lsquoLONrsquo Design Tool (Excel)hellip

AnswerhellipFrom lsquoLength of Needrsquo Excel Sheethellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Crash Cushion Index 544-001

Approach Terminals Solution 1lsquoCrash Cushionrsquobull ldquoSystem Widthrdquo ndash

lsquoWidersquo per SPI 544-001 Part C

bull ldquoLength Restrictionrdquo - per SPI 544-001 Part F

bull Contact Central Office for guidance

Note Define Crash Cushion with provided CADD cellhellipldquoSummary of Permanent Crash Cushions Tablerdquo

Guardrail Index 536-001 Crash Cushion Index 544-001

Approach Terminals Solution 1lsquoCrash Cushionrsquobull Guardrail ldquoreduced

post spacingrdquo to reduce required hazard setback per FDM Table 21542

bull Again contact Central Office for guidance for such limited space

Concrete Barrier Index 521-001 Crash Cushion 544-001

Approach Terminals Solution 2lsquoConcrete Barrierrsquo amp lsquoCrash Cushionrsquo

bull Requires project-specific design

bull Contact Central Office for guidance for such limited space

Questions

Richard Stepp PEStandard Plans Engineer

Central Office Roadway Design(850) 414-4313

richardsteppdotstateflus

Standard Plans Single-Slope Barriers

Page 41: Roadside Barriers - MASH Implementation Update & Design ... · Roadside Barriers - Lessons Learned 1. GUARDRAIL Standard Plans, Index 536-001 2. CONCRETE BARRIER Standard Plans, Index

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals

CREDIT VIRGINIA DOT ndash SKT Crash Test Published October 2016

httpswwwyoutubecomwatchv=74ImLTY-PhUampfeature=youtube

YES Wrong

First issuehellipTrees are within the Approach Terminalrsquos clear area in the Standard Plans (where a clear 110 slope required)

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach TerminalsYES Wrong

First issuehellipTrees are within the Approach Terminalrsquos clear area in the Standard Plans (where a clear 110 slope required)

From Standard Planshellip

Guardrail Index 536-001

YES Wrong

Second issuehellipTree violates barrier setback per FDM Table 21542

Guardrail Index 536-001

YES Wrong

Second issuehellipTree violates barrier setback per FDM Table 21542

From FDMhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Any issue hereYES Wrong

First issuehellipPerpendicular guardrail is not proven crashworthybull No end treatmentsbull Violates ldquotaper raterdquo

requirements of SPI Part I (big time)

bull Requires shielding if within Clear Zone

Answerhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Any issue hereYES Wrong

Second issuehellipPerpendicular guardrail within the Approach Terminalrsquos clear area in the Standard Plans (where a clear 110 slope required)

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Any issue hereYES Wrong

Third issuehellipPerpendicular guardrail violates barrier setback per FDM Table 21542

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Solution 1

REMOVE theperpendicularGuardrail

Orhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Solution 2

1 Extend Guardrail to meet Length of Need per SPI Part B (Excel lsquoDesign Toolrsquo) which is Roadside Design Guide Eq 5-3

2 Meet minimum barrier setback per FDM Table 21542 (5 feet for general guardrail)

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Final Case StudyAssumptionsbull Design Speed

50 mph

bull Piers designed to withstand 600 kip impact load per FDM215454(Pier Protection Barrier notRequired)

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereAnswerhellip YES

First issuehellipPiers NOT shielded

ldquoLength of Needrdquo NOT met per SPI Part B (Excel Design Tool)

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereAnswerhellip YES

First issuehellipPiers NOT shielded

ldquoLength of Needrdquo NOT met per SPI Part B (Excel Design Tool)

Piers are behind the ldquogatingrdquo(break-away) portion of Approach Terminal

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereYES

Second issuehellipFlared Terminal usage on hold per RDB18-02

Regardlesshellip ldquoTaper Raterdquo too steep here at Approach Terminal (about 13 shown)

Guardrail requires 115 Max Taper Rate per SPI Part I

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereAnswerhellip YES

Third issuehellipldquoBarrier Setbackrdquo requirement likely not satisfied

per FDM Table 21542(5 feet or greater)hellip

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereYES

Fourth issuehellipldquoTrailing Anchoragerdquo not properly extended downstream of hazard

25-foot Requirement SPI C1 amp lsquoLONrsquo Design Tool (Excel)hellip

Answerhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereYES

Fourth issuehellipldquoTrailing Anchoragerdquo not properly extended downstream of hazard

25-foot Requirement SPI C1 amp lsquoLONrsquo Design Tool (Excel)hellip

AnswerhellipFrom lsquoLength of Needrsquo Excel Sheethellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Crash Cushion Index 544-001

Approach Terminals Solution 1lsquoCrash Cushionrsquobull ldquoSystem Widthrdquo ndash

lsquoWidersquo per SPI 544-001 Part C

bull ldquoLength Restrictionrdquo - per SPI 544-001 Part F

bull Contact Central Office for guidance

Note Define Crash Cushion with provided CADD cellhellipldquoSummary of Permanent Crash Cushions Tablerdquo

Guardrail Index 536-001 Crash Cushion Index 544-001

Approach Terminals Solution 1lsquoCrash Cushionrsquobull Guardrail ldquoreduced

post spacingrdquo to reduce required hazard setback per FDM Table 21542

bull Again contact Central Office for guidance for such limited space

Concrete Barrier Index 521-001 Crash Cushion 544-001

Approach Terminals Solution 2lsquoConcrete Barrierrsquo amp lsquoCrash Cushionrsquo

bull Requires project-specific design

bull Contact Central Office for guidance for such limited space

Questions

Richard Stepp PEStandard Plans Engineer

Central Office Roadway Design(850) 414-4313

richardsteppdotstateflus

Standard Plans Single-Slope Barriers

Page 42: Roadside Barriers - MASH Implementation Update & Design ... · Roadside Barriers - Lessons Learned 1. GUARDRAIL Standard Plans, Index 536-001 2. CONCRETE BARRIER Standard Plans, Index

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach TerminalsYES Wrong

First issuehellipTrees are within the Approach Terminalrsquos clear area in the Standard Plans (where a clear 110 slope required)

From Standard Planshellip

Guardrail Index 536-001

YES Wrong

Second issuehellipTree violates barrier setback per FDM Table 21542

Guardrail Index 536-001

YES Wrong

Second issuehellipTree violates barrier setback per FDM Table 21542

From FDMhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Any issue hereYES Wrong

First issuehellipPerpendicular guardrail is not proven crashworthybull No end treatmentsbull Violates ldquotaper raterdquo

requirements of SPI Part I (big time)

bull Requires shielding if within Clear Zone

Answerhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Any issue hereYES Wrong

Second issuehellipPerpendicular guardrail within the Approach Terminalrsquos clear area in the Standard Plans (where a clear 110 slope required)

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Any issue hereYES Wrong

Third issuehellipPerpendicular guardrail violates barrier setback per FDM Table 21542

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Solution 1

REMOVE theperpendicularGuardrail

Orhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Solution 2

1 Extend Guardrail to meet Length of Need per SPI Part B (Excel lsquoDesign Toolrsquo) which is Roadside Design Guide Eq 5-3

2 Meet minimum barrier setback per FDM Table 21542 (5 feet for general guardrail)

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Final Case StudyAssumptionsbull Design Speed

50 mph

bull Piers designed to withstand 600 kip impact load per FDM215454(Pier Protection Barrier notRequired)

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereAnswerhellip YES

First issuehellipPiers NOT shielded

ldquoLength of Needrdquo NOT met per SPI Part B (Excel Design Tool)

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereAnswerhellip YES

First issuehellipPiers NOT shielded

ldquoLength of Needrdquo NOT met per SPI Part B (Excel Design Tool)

Piers are behind the ldquogatingrdquo(break-away) portion of Approach Terminal

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereYES

Second issuehellipFlared Terminal usage on hold per RDB18-02

Regardlesshellip ldquoTaper Raterdquo too steep here at Approach Terminal (about 13 shown)

Guardrail requires 115 Max Taper Rate per SPI Part I

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereAnswerhellip YES

Third issuehellipldquoBarrier Setbackrdquo requirement likely not satisfied

per FDM Table 21542(5 feet or greater)hellip

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereYES

Fourth issuehellipldquoTrailing Anchoragerdquo not properly extended downstream of hazard

25-foot Requirement SPI C1 amp lsquoLONrsquo Design Tool (Excel)hellip

Answerhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereYES

Fourth issuehellipldquoTrailing Anchoragerdquo not properly extended downstream of hazard

25-foot Requirement SPI C1 amp lsquoLONrsquo Design Tool (Excel)hellip

AnswerhellipFrom lsquoLength of Needrsquo Excel Sheethellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Crash Cushion Index 544-001

Approach Terminals Solution 1lsquoCrash Cushionrsquobull ldquoSystem Widthrdquo ndash

lsquoWidersquo per SPI 544-001 Part C

bull ldquoLength Restrictionrdquo - per SPI 544-001 Part F

bull Contact Central Office for guidance

Note Define Crash Cushion with provided CADD cellhellipldquoSummary of Permanent Crash Cushions Tablerdquo

Guardrail Index 536-001 Crash Cushion Index 544-001

Approach Terminals Solution 1lsquoCrash Cushionrsquobull Guardrail ldquoreduced

post spacingrdquo to reduce required hazard setback per FDM Table 21542

bull Again contact Central Office for guidance for such limited space

Concrete Barrier Index 521-001 Crash Cushion 544-001

Approach Terminals Solution 2lsquoConcrete Barrierrsquo amp lsquoCrash Cushionrsquo

bull Requires project-specific design

bull Contact Central Office for guidance for such limited space

Questions

Richard Stepp PEStandard Plans Engineer

Central Office Roadway Design(850) 414-4313

richardsteppdotstateflus

Standard Plans Single-Slope Barriers

Page 43: Roadside Barriers - MASH Implementation Update & Design ... · Roadside Barriers - Lessons Learned 1. GUARDRAIL Standard Plans, Index 536-001 2. CONCRETE BARRIER Standard Plans, Index

Guardrail Index 536-001

YES Wrong

Second issuehellipTree violates barrier setback per FDM Table 21542

Guardrail Index 536-001

YES Wrong

Second issuehellipTree violates barrier setback per FDM Table 21542

From FDMhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Any issue hereYES Wrong

First issuehellipPerpendicular guardrail is not proven crashworthybull No end treatmentsbull Violates ldquotaper raterdquo

requirements of SPI Part I (big time)

bull Requires shielding if within Clear Zone

Answerhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Any issue hereYES Wrong

Second issuehellipPerpendicular guardrail within the Approach Terminalrsquos clear area in the Standard Plans (where a clear 110 slope required)

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Any issue hereYES Wrong

Third issuehellipPerpendicular guardrail violates barrier setback per FDM Table 21542

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Solution 1

REMOVE theperpendicularGuardrail

Orhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Solution 2

1 Extend Guardrail to meet Length of Need per SPI Part B (Excel lsquoDesign Toolrsquo) which is Roadside Design Guide Eq 5-3

2 Meet minimum barrier setback per FDM Table 21542 (5 feet for general guardrail)

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Final Case StudyAssumptionsbull Design Speed

50 mph

bull Piers designed to withstand 600 kip impact load per FDM215454(Pier Protection Barrier notRequired)

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereAnswerhellip YES

First issuehellipPiers NOT shielded

ldquoLength of Needrdquo NOT met per SPI Part B (Excel Design Tool)

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereAnswerhellip YES

First issuehellipPiers NOT shielded

ldquoLength of Needrdquo NOT met per SPI Part B (Excel Design Tool)

Piers are behind the ldquogatingrdquo(break-away) portion of Approach Terminal

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereYES

Second issuehellipFlared Terminal usage on hold per RDB18-02

Regardlesshellip ldquoTaper Raterdquo too steep here at Approach Terminal (about 13 shown)

Guardrail requires 115 Max Taper Rate per SPI Part I

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereAnswerhellip YES

Third issuehellipldquoBarrier Setbackrdquo requirement likely not satisfied

per FDM Table 21542(5 feet or greater)hellip

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereYES

Fourth issuehellipldquoTrailing Anchoragerdquo not properly extended downstream of hazard

25-foot Requirement SPI C1 amp lsquoLONrsquo Design Tool (Excel)hellip

Answerhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereYES

Fourth issuehellipldquoTrailing Anchoragerdquo not properly extended downstream of hazard

25-foot Requirement SPI C1 amp lsquoLONrsquo Design Tool (Excel)hellip

AnswerhellipFrom lsquoLength of Needrsquo Excel Sheethellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Crash Cushion Index 544-001

Approach Terminals Solution 1lsquoCrash Cushionrsquobull ldquoSystem Widthrdquo ndash

lsquoWidersquo per SPI 544-001 Part C

bull ldquoLength Restrictionrdquo - per SPI 544-001 Part F

bull Contact Central Office for guidance

Note Define Crash Cushion with provided CADD cellhellipldquoSummary of Permanent Crash Cushions Tablerdquo

Guardrail Index 536-001 Crash Cushion Index 544-001

Approach Terminals Solution 1lsquoCrash Cushionrsquobull Guardrail ldquoreduced

post spacingrdquo to reduce required hazard setback per FDM Table 21542

bull Again contact Central Office for guidance for such limited space

Concrete Barrier Index 521-001 Crash Cushion 544-001

Approach Terminals Solution 2lsquoConcrete Barrierrsquo amp lsquoCrash Cushionrsquo

bull Requires project-specific design

bull Contact Central Office for guidance for such limited space

Questions

Richard Stepp PEStandard Plans Engineer

Central Office Roadway Design(850) 414-4313

richardsteppdotstateflus

Standard Plans Single-Slope Barriers

Page 44: Roadside Barriers - MASH Implementation Update & Design ... · Roadside Barriers - Lessons Learned 1. GUARDRAIL Standard Plans, Index 536-001 2. CONCRETE BARRIER Standard Plans, Index

Guardrail Index 536-001

YES Wrong

Second issuehellipTree violates barrier setback per FDM Table 21542

From FDMhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Any issue hereYES Wrong

First issuehellipPerpendicular guardrail is not proven crashworthybull No end treatmentsbull Violates ldquotaper raterdquo

requirements of SPI Part I (big time)

bull Requires shielding if within Clear Zone

Answerhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Any issue hereYES Wrong

Second issuehellipPerpendicular guardrail within the Approach Terminalrsquos clear area in the Standard Plans (where a clear 110 slope required)

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Any issue hereYES Wrong

Third issuehellipPerpendicular guardrail violates barrier setback per FDM Table 21542

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Solution 1

REMOVE theperpendicularGuardrail

Orhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Solution 2

1 Extend Guardrail to meet Length of Need per SPI Part B (Excel lsquoDesign Toolrsquo) which is Roadside Design Guide Eq 5-3

2 Meet minimum barrier setback per FDM Table 21542 (5 feet for general guardrail)

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Final Case StudyAssumptionsbull Design Speed

50 mph

bull Piers designed to withstand 600 kip impact load per FDM215454(Pier Protection Barrier notRequired)

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereAnswerhellip YES

First issuehellipPiers NOT shielded

ldquoLength of Needrdquo NOT met per SPI Part B (Excel Design Tool)

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereAnswerhellip YES

First issuehellipPiers NOT shielded

ldquoLength of Needrdquo NOT met per SPI Part B (Excel Design Tool)

Piers are behind the ldquogatingrdquo(break-away) portion of Approach Terminal

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereYES

Second issuehellipFlared Terminal usage on hold per RDB18-02

Regardlesshellip ldquoTaper Raterdquo too steep here at Approach Terminal (about 13 shown)

Guardrail requires 115 Max Taper Rate per SPI Part I

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereAnswerhellip YES

Third issuehellipldquoBarrier Setbackrdquo requirement likely not satisfied

per FDM Table 21542(5 feet or greater)hellip

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereYES

Fourth issuehellipldquoTrailing Anchoragerdquo not properly extended downstream of hazard

25-foot Requirement SPI C1 amp lsquoLONrsquo Design Tool (Excel)hellip

Answerhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereYES

Fourth issuehellipldquoTrailing Anchoragerdquo not properly extended downstream of hazard

25-foot Requirement SPI C1 amp lsquoLONrsquo Design Tool (Excel)hellip

AnswerhellipFrom lsquoLength of Needrsquo Excel Sheethellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Crash Cushion Index 544-001

Approach Terminals Solution 1lsquoCrash Cushionrsquobull ldquoSystem Widthrdquo ndash

lsquoWidersquo per SPI 544-001 Part C

bull ldquoLength Restrictionrdquo - per SPI 544-001 Part F

bull Contact Central Office for guidance

Note Define Crash Cushion with provided CADD cellhellipldquoSummary of Permanent Crash Cushions Tablerdquo

Guardrail Index 536-001 Crash Cushion Index 544-001

Approach Terminals Solution 1lsquoCrash Cushionrsquobull Guardrail ldquoreduced

post spacingrdquo to reduce required hazard setback per FDM Table 21542

bull Again contact Central Office for guidance for such limited space

Concrete Barrier Index 521-001 Crash Cushion 544-001

Approach Terminals Solution 2lsquoConcrete Barrierrsquo amp lsquoCrash Cushionrsquo

bull Requires project-specific design

bull Contact Central Office for guidance for such limited space

Questions

Richard Stepp PEStandard Plans Engineer

Central Office Roadway Design(850) 414-4313

richardsteppdotstateflus

Standard Plans Single-Slope Barriers

Page 45: Roadside Barriers - MASH Implementation Update & Design ... · Roadside Barriers - Lessons Learned 1. GUARDRAIL Standard Plans, Index 536-001 2. CONCRETE BARRIER Standard Plans, Index

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Any issue hereYES Wrong

First issuehellipPerpendicular guardrail is not proven crashworthybull No end treatmentsbull Violates ldquotaper raterdquo

requirements of SPI Part I (big time)

bull Requires shielding if within Clear Zone

Answerhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Any issue hereYES Wrong

Second issuehellipPerpendicular guardrail within the Approach Terminalrsquos clear area in the Standard Plans (where a clear 110 slope required)

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Any issue hereYES Wrong

Third issuehellipPerpendicular guardrail violates barrier setback per FDM Table 21542

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Solution 1

REMOVE theperpendicularGuardrail

Orhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Solution 2

1 Extend Guardrail to meet Length of Need per SPI Part B (Excel lsquoDesign Toolrsquo) which is Roadside Design Guide Eq 5-3

2 Meet minimum barrier setback per FDM Table 21542 (5 feet for general guardrail)

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Final Case StudyAssumptionsbull Design Speed

50 mph

bull Piers designed to withstand 600 kip impact load per FDM215454(Pier Protection Barrier notRequired)

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereAnswerhellip YES

First issuehellipPiers NOT shielded

ldquoLength of Needrdquo NOT met per SPI Part B (Excel Design Tool)

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereAnswerhellip YES

First issuehellipPiers NOT shielded

ldquoLength of Needrdquo NOT met per SPI Part B (Excel Design Tool)

Piers are behind the ldquogatingrdquo(break-away) portion of Approach Terminal

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereYES

Second issuehellipFlared Terminal usage on hold per RDB18-02

Regardlesshellip ldquoTaper Raterdquo too steep here at Approach Terminal (about 13 shown)

Guardrail requires 115 Max Taper Rate per SPI Part I

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereAnswerhellip YES

Third issuehellipldquoBarrier Setbackrdquo requirement likely not satisfied

per FDM Table 21542(5 feet or greater)hellip

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereYES

Fourth issuehellipldquoTrailing Anchoragerdquo not properly extended downstream of hazard

25-foot Requirement SPI C1 amp lsquoLONrsquo Design Tool (Excel)hellip

Answerhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereYES

Fourth issuehellipldquoTrailing Anchoragerdquo not properly extended downstream of hazard

25-foot Requirement SPI C1 amp lsquoLONrsquo Design Tool (Excel)hellip

AnswerhellipFrom lsquoLength of Needrsquo Excel Sheethellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Crash Cushion Index 544-001

Approach Terminals Solution 1lsquoCrash Cushionrsquobull ldquoSystem Widthrdquo ndash

lsquoWidersquo per SPI 544-001 Part C

bull ldquoLength Restrictionrdquo - per SPI 544-001 Part F

bull Contact Central Office for guidance

Note Define Crash Cushion with provided CADD cellhellipldquoSummary of Permanent Crash Cushions Tablerdquo

Guardrail Index 536-001 Crash Cushion Index 544-001

Approach Terminals Solution 1lsquoCrash Cushionrsquobull Guardrail ldquoreduced

post spacingrdquo to reduce required hazard setback per FDM Table 21542

bull Again contact Central Office for guidance for such limited space

Concrete Barrier Index 521-001 Crash Cushion 544-001

Approach Terminals Solution 2lsquoConcrete Barrierrsquo amp lsquoCrash Cushionrsquo

bull Requires project-specific design

bull Contact Central Office for guidance for such limited space

Questions

Richard Stepp PEStandard Plans Engineer

Central Office Roadway Design(850) 414-4313

richardsteppdotstateflus

Standard Plans Single-Slope Barriers

Page 46: Roadside Barriers - MASH Implementation Update & Design ... · Roadside Barriers - Lessons Learned 1. GUARDRAIL Standard Plans, Index 536-001 2. CONCRETE BARRIER Standard Plans, Index

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Any issue hereYES Wrong

Second issuehellipPerpendicular guardrail within the Approach Terminalrsquos clear area in the Standard Plans (where a clear 110 slope required)

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Any issue hereYES Wrong

Third issuehellipPerpendicular guardrail violates barrier setback per FDM Table 21542

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Solution 1

REMOVE theperpendicularGuardrail

Orhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Solution 2

1 Extend Guardrail to meet Length of Need per SPI Part B (Excel lsquoDesign Toolrsquo) which is Roadside Design Guide Eq 5-3

2 Meet minimum barrier setback per FDM Table 21542 (5 feet for general guardrail)

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Final Case StudyAssumptionsbull Design Speed

50 mph

bull Piers designed to withstand 600 kip impact load per FDM215454(Pier Protection Barrier notRequired)

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereAnswerhellip YES

First issuehellipPiers NOT shielded

ldquoLength of Needrdquo NOT met per SPI Part B (Excel Design Tool)

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereAnswerhellip YES

First issuehellipPiers NOT shielded

ldquoLength of Needrdquo NOT met per SPI Part B (Excel Design Tool)

Piers are behind the ldquogatingrdquo(break-away) portion of Approach Terminal

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereYES

Second issuehellipFlared Terminal usage on hold per RDB18-02

Regardlesshellip ldquoTaper Raterdquo too steep here at Approach Terminal (about 13 shown)

Guardrail requires 115 Max Taper Rate per SPI Part I

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereAnswerhellip YES

Third issuehellipldquoBarrier Setbackrdquo requirement likely not satisfied

per FDM Table 21542(5 feet or greater)hellip

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereYES

Fourth issuehellipldquoTrailing Anchoragerdquo not properly extended downstream of hazard

25-foot Requirement SPI C1 amp lsquoLONrsquo Design Tool (Excel)hellip

Answerhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereYES

Fourth issuehellipldquoTrailing Anchoragerdquo not properly extended downstream of hazard

25-foot Requirement SPI C1 amp lsquoLONrsquo Design Tool (Excel)hellip

AnswerhellipFrom lsquoLength of Needrsquo Excel Sheethellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Crash Cushion Index 544-001

Approach Terminals Solution 1lsquoCrash Cushionrsquobull ldquoSystem Widthrdquo ndash

lsquoWidersquo per SPI 544-001 Part C

bull ldquoLength Restrictionrdquo - per SPI 544-001 Part F

bull Contact Central Office for guidance

Note Define Crash Cushion with provided CADD cellhellipldquoSummary of Permanent Crash Cushions Tablerdquo

Guardrail Index 536-001 Crash Cushion Index 544-001

Approach Terminals Solution 1lsquoCrash Cushionrsquobull Guardrail ldquoreduced

post spacingrdquo to reduce required hazard setback per FDM Table 21542

bull Again contact Central Office for guidance for such limited space

Concrete Barrier Index 521-001 Crash Cushion 544-001

Approach Terminals Solution 2lsquoConcrete Barrierrsquo amp lsquoCrash Cushionrsquo

bull Requires project-specific design

bull Contact Central Office for guidance for such limited space

Questions

Richard Stepp PEStandard Plans Engineer

Central Office Roadway Design(850) 414-4313

richardsteppdotstateflus

Standard Plans Single-Slope Barriers

Page 47: Roadside Barriers - MASH Implementation Update & Design ... · Roadside Barriers - Lessons Learned 1. GUARDRAIL Standard Plans, Index 536-001 2. CONCRETE BARRIER Standard Plans, Index

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Any issue hereYES Wrong

Third issuehellipPerpendicular guardrail violates barrier setback per FDM Table 21542

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Solution 1

REMOVE theperpendicularGuardrail

Orhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Solution 2

1 Extend Guardrail to meet Length of Need per SPI Part B (Excel lsquoDesign Toolrsquo) which is Roadside Design Guide Eq 5-3

2 Meet minimum barrier setback per FDM Table 21542 (5 feet for general guardrail)

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Final Case StudyAssumptionsbull Design Speed

50 mph

bull Piers designed to withstand 600 kip impact load per FDM215454(Pier Protection Barrier notRequired)

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereAnswerhellip YES

First issuehellipPiers NOT shielded

ldquoLength of Needrdquo NOT met per SPI Part B (Excel Design Tool)

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereAnswerhellip YES

First issuehellipPiers NOT shielded

ldquoLength of Needrdquo NOT met per SPI Part B (Excel Design Tool)

Piers are behind the ldquogatingrdquo(break-away) portion of Approach Terminal

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereYES

Second issuehellipFlared Terminal usage on hold per RDB18-02

Regardlesshellip ldquoTaper Raterdquo too steep here at Approach Terminal (about 13 shown)

Guardrail requires 115 Max Taper Rate per SPI Part I

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereAnswerhellip YES

Third issuehellipldquoBarrier Setbackrdquo requirement likely not satisfied

per FDM Table 21542(5 feet or greater)hellip

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereYES

Fourth issuehellipldquoTrailing Anchoragerdquo not properly extended downstream of hazard

25-foot Requirement SPI C1 amp lsquoLONrsquo Design Tool (Excel)hellip

Answerhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereYES

Fourth issuehellipldquoTrailing Anchoragerdquo not properly extended downstream of hazard

25-foot Requirement SPI C1 amp lsquoLONrsquo Design Tool (Excel)hellip

AnswerhellipFrom lsquoLength of Needrsquo Excel Sheethellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Crash Cushion Index 544-001

Approach Terminals Solution 1lsquoCrash Cushionrsquobull ldquoSystem Widthrdquo ndash

lsquoWidersquo per SPI 544-001 Part C

bull ldquoLength Restrictionrdquo - per SPI 544-001 Part F

bull Contact Central Office for guidance

Note Define Crash Cushion with provided CADD cellhellipldquoSummary of Permanent Crash Cushions Tablerdquo

Guardrail Index 536-001 Crash Cushion Index 544-001

Approach Terminals Solution 1lsquoCrash Cushionrsquobull Guardrail ldquoreduced

post spacingrdquo to reduce required hazard setback per FDM Table 21542

bull Again contact Central Office for guidance for such limited space

Concrete Barrier Index 521-001 Crash Cushion 544-001

Approach Terminals Solution 2lsquoConcrete Barrierrsquo amp lsquoCrash Cushionrsquo

bull Requires project-specific design

bull Contact Central Office for guidance for such limited space

Questions

Richard Stepp PEStandard Plans Engineer

Central Office Roadway Design(850) 414-4313

richardsteppdotstateflus

Standard Plans Single-Slope Barriers

Page 48: Roadside Barriers - MASH Implementation Update & Design ... · Roadside Barriers - Lessons Learned 1. GUARDRAIL Standard Plans, Index 536-001 2. CONCRETE BARRIER Standard Plans, Index

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Solution 1

REMOVE theperpendicularGuardrail

Orhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Solution 2

1 Extend Guardrail to meet Length of Need per SPI Part B (Excel lsquoDesign Toolrsquo) which is Roadside Design Guide Eq 5-3

2 Meet minimum barrier setback per FDM Table 21542 (5 feet for general guardrail)

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Final Case StudyAssumptionsbull Design Speed

50 mph

bull Piers designed to withstand 600 kip impact load per FDM215454(Pier Protection Barrier notRequired)

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereAnswerhellip YES

First issuehellipPiers NOT shielded

ldquoLength of Needrdquo NOT met per SPI Part B (Excel Design Tool)

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereAnswerhellip YES

First issuehellipPiers NOT shielded

ldquoLength of Needrdquo NOT met per SPI Part B (Excel Design Tool)

Piers are behind the ldquogatingrdquo(break-away) portion of Approach Terminal

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereYES

Second issuehellipFlared Terminal usage on hold per RDB18-02

Regardlesshellip ldquoTaper Raterdquo too steep here at Approach Terminal (about 13 shown)

Guardrail requires 115 Max Taper Rate per SPI Part I

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereAnswerhellip YES

Third issuehellipldquoBarrier Setbackrdquo requirement likely not satisfied

per FDM Table 21542(5 feet or greater)hellip

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereYES

Fourth issuehellipldquoTrailing Anchoragerdquo not properly extended downstream of hazard

25-foot Requirement SPI C1 amp lsquoLONrsquo Design Tool (Excel)hellip

Answerhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereYES

Fourth issuehellipldquoTrailing Anchoragerdquo not properly extended downstream of hazard

25-foot Requirement SPI C1 amp lsquoLONrsquo Design Tool (Excel)hellip

AnswerhellipFrom lsquoLength of Needrsquo Excel Sheethellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Crash Cushion Index 544-001

Approach Terminals Solution 1lsquoCrash Cushionrsquobull ldquoSystem Widthrdquo ndash

lsquoWidersquo per SPI 544-001 Part C

bull ldquoLength Restrictionrdquo - per SPI 544-001 Part F

bull Contact Central Office for guidance

Note Define Crash Cushion with provided CADD cellhellipldquoSummary of Permanent Crash Cushions Tablerdquo

Guardrail Index 536-001 Crash Cushion Index 544-001

Approach Terminals Solution 1lsquoCrash Cushionrsquobull Guardrail ldquoreduced

post spacingrdquo to reduce required hazard setback per FDM Table 21542

bull Again contact Central Office for guidance for such limited space

Concrete Barrier Index 521-001 Crash Cushion 544-001

Approach Terminals Solution 2lsquoConcrete Barrierrsquo amp lsquoCrash Cushionrsquo

bull Requires project-specific design

bull Contact Central Office for guidance for such limited space

Questions

Richard Stepp PEStandard Plans Engineer

Central Office Roadway Design(850) 414-4313

richardsteppdotstateflus

Standard Plans Single-Slope Barriers

Page 49: Roadside Barriers - MASH Implementation Update & Design ... · Roadside Barriers - Lessons Learned 1. GUARDRAIL Standard Plans, Index 536-001 2. CONCRETE BARRIER Standard Plans, Index

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Solution 2

1 Extend Guardrail to meet Length of Need per SPI Part B (Excel lsquoDesign Toolrsquo) which is Roadside Design Guide Eq 5-3

2 Meet minimum barrier setback per FDM Table 21542 (5 feet for general guardrail)

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Final Case StudyAssumptionsbull Design Speed

50 mph

bull Piers designed to withstand 600 kip impact load per FDM215454(Pier Protection Barrier notRequired)

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereAnswerhellip YES

First issuehellipPiers NOT shielded

ldquoLength of Needrdquo NOT met per SPI Part B (Excel Design Tool)

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereAnswerhellip YES

First issuehellipPiers NOT shielded

ldquoLength of Needrdquo NOT met per SPI Part B (Excel Design Tool)

Piers are behind the ldquogatingrdquo(break-away) portion of Approach Terminal

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereYES

Second issuehellipFlared Terminal usage on hold per RDB18-02

Regardlesshellip ldquoTaper Raterdquo too steep here at Approach Terminal (about 13 shown)

Guardrail requires 115 Max Taper Rate per SPI Part I

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereAnswerhellip YES

Third issuehellipldquoBarrier Setbackrdquo requirement likely not satisfied

per FDM Table 21542(5 feet or greater)hellip

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereYES

Fourth issuehellipldquoTrailing Anchoragerdquo not properly extended downstream of hazard

25-foot Requirement SPI C1 amp lsquoLONrsquo Design Tool (Excel)hellip

Answerhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereYES

Fourth issuehellipldquoTrailing Anchoragerdquo not properly extended downstream of hazard

25-foot Requirement SPI C1 amp lsquoLONrsquo Design Tool (Excel)hellip

AnswerhellipFrom lsquoLength of Needrsquo Excel Sheethellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Crash Cushion Index 544-001

Approach Terminals Solution 1lsquoCrash Cushionrsquobull ldquoSystem Widthrdquo ndash

lsquoWidersquo per SPI 544-001 Part C

bull ldquoLength Restrictionrdquo - per SPI 544-001 Part F

bull Contact Central Office for guidance

Note Define Crash Cushion with provided CADD cellhellipldquoSummary of Permanent Crash Cushions Tablerdquo

Guardrail Index 536-001 Crash Cushion Index 544-001

Approach Terminals Solution 1lsquoCrash Cushionrsquobull Guardrail ldquoreduced

post spacingrdquo to reduce required hazard setback per FDM Table 21542

bull Again contact Central Office for guidance for such limited space

Concrete Barrier Index 521-001 Crash Cushion 544-001

Approach Terminals Solution 2lsquoConcrete Barrierrsquo amp lsquoCrash Cushionrsquo

bull Requires project-specific design

bull Contact Central Office for guidance for such limited space

Questions

Richard Stepp PEStandard Plans Engineer

Central Office Roadway Design(850) 414-4313

richardsteppdotstateflus

Standard Plans Single-Slope Barriers

Page 50: Roadside Barriers - MASH Implementation Update & Design ... · Roadside Barriers - Lessons Learned 1. GUARDRAIL Standard Plans, Index 536-001 2. CONCRETE BARRIER Standard Plans, Index

Guardrail Index 536-001 Sheets 7-8

Approach Terminals Final Case StudyAssumptionsbull Design Speed

50 mph

bull Piers designed to withstand 600 kip impact load per FDM215454(Pier Protection Barrier notRequired)

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereAnswerhellip YES

First issuehellipPiers NOT shielded

ldquoLength of Needrdquo NOT met per SPI Part B (Excel Design Tool)

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereAnswerhellip YES

First issuehellipPiers NOT shielded

ldquoLength of Needrdquo NOT met per SPI Part B (Excel Design Tool)

Piers are behind the ldquogatingrdquo(break-away) portion of Approach Terminal

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereYES

Second issuehellipFlared Terminal usage on hold per RDB18-02

Regardlesshellip ldquoTaper Raterdquo too steep here at Approach Terminal (about 13 shown)

Guardrail requires 115 Max Taper Rate per SPI Part I

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereAnswerhellip YES

Third issuehellipldquoBarrier Setbackrdquo requirement likely not satisfied

per FDM Table 21542(5 feet or greater)hellip

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereYES

Fourth issuehellipldquoTrailing Anchoragerdquo not properly extended downstream of hazard

25-foot Requirement SPI C1 amp lsquoLONrsquo Design Tool (Excel)hellip

Answerhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereYES

Fourth issuehellipldquoTrailing Anchoragerdquo not properly extended downstream of hazard

25-foot Requirement SPI C1 amp lsquoLONrsquo Design Tool (Excel)hellip

AnswerhellipFrom lsquoLength of Needrsquo Excel Sheethellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Crash Cushion Index 544-001

Approach Terminals Solution 1lsquoCrash Cushionrsquobull ldquoSystem Widthrdquo ndash

lsquoWidersquo per SPI 544-001 Part C

bull ldquoLength Restrictionrdquo - per SPI 544-001 Part F

bull Contact Central Office for guidance

Note Define Crash Cushion with provided CADD cellhellipldquoSummary of Permanent Crash Cushions Tablerdquo

Guardrail Index 536-001 Crash Cushion Index 544-001

Approach Terminals Solution 1lsquoCrash Cushionrsquobull Guardrail ldquoreduced

post spacingrdquo to reduce required hazard setback per FDM Table 21542

bull Again contact Central Office for guidance for such limited space

Concrete Barrier Index 521-001 Crash Cushion 544-001

Approach Terminals Solution 2lsquoConcrete Barrierrsquo amp lsquoCrash Cushionrsquo

bull Requires project-specific design

bull Contact Central Office for guidance for such limited space

Questions

Richard Stepp PEStandard Plans Engineer

Central Office Roadway Design(850) 414-4313

richardsteppdotstateflus

Standard Plans Single-Slope Barriers

Page 51: Roadside Barriers - MASH Implementation Update & Design ... · Roadside Barriers - Lessons Learned 1. GUARDRAIL Standard Plans, Index 536-001 2. CONCRETE BARRIER Standard Plans, Index

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereAnswerhellip YES

First issuehellipPiers NOT shielded

ldquoLength of Needrdquo NOT met per SPI Part B (Excel Design Tool)

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereAnswerhellip YES

First issuehellipPiers NOT shielded

ldquoLength of Needrdquo NOT met per SPI Part B (Excel Design Tool)

Piers are behind the ldquogatingrdquo(break-away) portion of Approach Terminal

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereYES

Second issuehellipFlared Terminal usage on hold per RDB18-02

Regardlesshellip ldquoTaper Raterdquo too steep here at Approach Terminal (about 13 shown)

Guardrail requires 115 Max Taper Rate per SPI Part I

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereAnswerhellip YES

Third issuehellipldquoBarrier Setbackrdquo requirement likely not satisfied

per FDM Table 21542(5 feet or greater)hellip

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereYES

Fourth issuehellipldquoTrailing Anchoragerdquo not properly extended downstream of hazard

25-foot Requirement SPI C1 amp lsquoLONrsquo Design Tool (Excel)hellip

Answerhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereYES

Fourth issuehellipldquoTrailing Anchoragerdquo not properly extended downstream of hazard

25-foot Requirement SPI C1 amp lsquoLONrsquo Design Tool (Excel)hellip

AnswerhellipFrom lsquoLength of Needrsquo Excel Sheethellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Crash Cushion Index 544-001

Approach Terminals Solution 1lsquoCrash Cushionrsquobull ldquoSystem Widthrdquo ndash

lsquoWidersquo per SPI 544-001 Part C

bull ldquoLength Restrictionrdquo - per SPI 544-001 Part F

bull Contact Central Office for guidance

Note Define Crash Cushion with provided CADD cellhellipldquoSummary of Permanent Crash Cushions Tablerdquo

Guardrail Index 536-001 Crash Cushion Index 544-001

Approach Terminals Solution 1lsquoCrash Cushionrsquobull Guardrail ldquoreduced

post spacingrdquo to reduce required hazard setback per FDM Table 21542

bull Again contact Central Office for guidance for such limited space

Concrete Barrier Index 521-001 Crash Cushion 544-001

Approach Terminals Solution 2lsquoConcrete Barrierrsquo amp lsquoCrash Cushionrsquo

bull Requires project-specific design

bull Contact Central Office for guidance for such limited space

Questions

Richard Stepp PEStandard Plans Engineer

Central Office Roadway Design(850) 414-4313

richardsteppdotstateflus

Standard Plans Single-Slope Barriers

Page 52: Roadside Barriers - MASH Implementation Update & Design ... · Roadside Barriers - Lessons Learned 1. GUARDRAIL Standard Plans, Index 536-001 2. CONCRETE BARRIER Standard Plans, Index

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereAnswerhellip YES

First issuehellipPiers NOT shielded

ldquoLength of Needrdquo NOT met per SPI Part B (Excel Design Tool)

Piers are behind the ldquogatingrdquo(break-away) portion of Approach Terminal

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereYES

Second issuehellipFlared Terminal usage on hold per RDB18-02

Regardlesshellip ldquoTaper Raterdquo too steep here at Approach Terminal (about 13 shown)

Guardrail requires 115 Max Taper Rate per SPI Part I

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereAnswerhellip YES

Third issuehellipldquoBarrier Setbackrdquo requirement likely not satisfied

per FDM Table 21542(5 feet or greater)hellip

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereYES

Fourth issuehellipldquoTrailing Anchoragerdquo not properly extended downstream of hazard

25-foot Requirement SPI C1 amp lsquoLONrsquo Design Tool (Excel)hellip

Answerhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereYES

Fourth issuehellipldquoTrailing Anchoragerdquo not properly extended downstream of hazard

25-foot Requirement SPI C1 amp lsquoLONrsquo Design Tool (Excel)hellip

AnswerhellipFrom lsquoLength of Needrsquo Excel Sheethellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Crash Cushion Index 544-001

Approach Terminals Solution 1lsquoCrash Cushionrsquobull ldquoSystem Widthrdquo ndash

lsquoWidersquo per SPI 544-001 Part C

bull ldquoLength Restrictionrdquo - per SPI 544-001 Part F

bull Contact Central Office for guidance

Note Define Crash Cushion with provided CADD cellhellipldquoSummary of Permanent Crash Cushions Tablerdquo

Guardrail Index 536-001 Crash Cushion Index 544-001

Approach Terminals Solution 1lsquoCrash Cushionrsquobull Guardrail ldquoreduced

post spacingrdquo to reduce required hazard setback per FDM Table 21542

bull Again contact Central Office for guidance for such limited space

Concrete Barrier Index 521-001 Crash Cushion 544-001

Approach Terminals Solution 2lsquoConcrete Barrierrsquo amp lsquoCrash Cushionrsquo

bull Requires project-specific design

bull Contact Central Office for guidance for such limited space

Questions

Richard Stepp PEStandard Plans Engineer

Central Office Roadway Design(850) 414-4313

richardsteppdotstateflus

Standard Plans Single-Slope Barriers

Page 53: Roadside Barriers - MASH Implementation Update & Design ... · Roadside Barriers - Lessons Learned 1. GUARDRAIL Standard Plans, Index 536-001 2. CONCRETE BARRIER Standard Plans, Index

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereYES

Second issuehellipFlared Terminal usage on hold per RDB18-02

Regardlesshellip ldquoTaper Raterdquo too steep here at Approach Terminal (about 13 shown)

Guardrail requires 115 Max Taper Rate per SPI Part I

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereAnswerhellip YES

Third issuehellipldquoBarrier Setbackrdquo requirement likely not satisfied

per FDM Table 21542(5 feet or greater)hellip

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereYES

Fourth issuehellipldquoTrailing Anchoragerdquo not properly extended downstream of hazard

25-foot Requirement SPI C1 amp lsquoLONrsquo Design Tool (Excel)hellip

Answerhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereYES

Fourth issuehellipldquoTrailing Anchoragerdquo not properly extended downstream of hazard

25-foot Requirement SPI C1 amp lsquoLONrsquo Design Tool (Excel)hellip

AnswerhellipFrom lsquoLength of Needrsquo Excel Sheethellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Crash Cushion Index 544-001

Approach Terminals Solution 1lsquoCrash Cushionrsquobull ldquoSystem Widthrdquo ndash

lsquoWidersquo per SPI 544-001 Part C

bull ldquoLength Restrictionrdquo - per SPI 544-001 Part F

bull Contact Central Office for guidance

Note Define Crash Cushion with provided CADD cellhellipldquoSummary of Permanent Crash Cushions Tablerdquo

Guardrail Index 536-001 Crash Cushion Index 544-001

Approach Terminals Solution 1lsquoCrash Cushionrsquobull Guardrail ldquoreduced

post spacingrdquo to reduce required hazard setback per FDM Table 21542

bull Again contact Central Office for guidance for such limited space

Concrete Barrier Index 521-001 Crash Cushion 544-001

Approach Terminals Solution 2lsquoConcrete Barrierrsquo amp lsquoCrash Cushionrsquo

bull Requires project-specific design

bull Contact Central Office for guidance for such limited space

Questions

Richard Stepp PEStandard Plans Engineer

Central Office Roadway Design(850) 414-4313

richardsteppdotstateflus

Standard Plans Single-Slope Barriers

Page 54: Roadside Barriers - MASH Implementation Update & Design ... · Roadside Barriers - Lessons Learned 1. GUARDRAIL Standard Plans, Index 536-001 2. CONCRETE BARRIER Standard Plans, Index

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereAnswerhellip YES

Third issuehellipldquoBarrier Setbackrdquo requirement likely not satisfied

per FDM Table 21542(5 feet or greater)hellip

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereYES

Fourth issuehellipldquoTrailing Anchoragerdquo not properly extended downstream of hazard

25-foot Requirement SPI C1 amp lsquoLONrsquo Design Tool (Excel)hellip

Answerhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereYES

Fourth issuehellipldquoTrailing Anchoragerdquo not properly extended downstream of hazard

25-foot Requirement SPI C1 amp lsquoLONrsquo Design Tool (Excel)hellip

AnswerhellipFrom lsquoLength of Needrsquo Excel Sheethellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Crash Cushion Index 544-001

Approach Terminals Solution 1lsquoCrash Cushionrsquobull ldquoSystem Widthrdquo ndash

lsquoWidersquo per SPI 544-001 Part C

bull ldquoLength Restrictionrdquo - per SPI 544-001 Part F

bull Contact Central Office for guidance

Note Define Crash Cushion with provided CADD cellhellipldquoSummary of Permanent Crash Cushions Tablerdquo

Guardrail Index 536-001 Crash Cushion Index 544-001

Approach Terminals Solution 1lsquoCrash Cushionrsquobull Guardrail ldquoreduced

post spacingrdquo to reduce required hazard setback per FDM Table 21542

bull Again contact Central Office for guidance for such limited space

Concrete Barrier Index 521-001 Crash Cushion 544-001

Approach Terminals Solution 2lsquoConcrete Barrierrsquo amp lsquoCrash Cushionrsquo

bull Requires project-specific design

bull Contact Central Office for guidance for such limited space

Questions

Richard Stepp PEStandard Plans Engineer

Central Office Roadway Design(850) 414-4313

richardsteppdotstateflus

Standard Plans Single-Slope Barriers

Page 55: Roadside Barriers - MASH Implementation Update & Design ... · Roadside Barriers - Lessons Learned 1. GUARDRAIL Standard Plans, Index 536-001 2. CONCRETE BARRIER Standard Plans, Index

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereYES

Fourth issuehellipldquoTrailing Anchoragerdquo not properly extended downstream of hazard

25-foot Requirement SPI C1 amp lsquoLONrsquo Design Tool (Excel)hellip

Answerhellip

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereYES

Fourth issuehellipldquoTrailing Anchoragerdquo not properly extended downstream of hazard

25-foot Requirement SPI C1 amp lsquoLONrsquo Design Tool (Excel)hellip

AnswerhellipFrom lsquoLength of Needrsquo Excel Sheethellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Crash Cushion Index 544-001

Approach Terminals Solution 1lsquoCrash Cushionrsquobull ldquoSystem Widthrdquo ndash

lsquoWidersquo per SPI 544-001 Part C

bull ldquoLength Restrictionrdquo - per SPI 544-001 Part F

bull Contact Central Office for guidance

Note Define Crash Cushion with provided CADD cellhellipldquoSummary of Permanent Crash Cushions Tablerdquo

Guardrail Index 536-001 Crash Cushion Index 544-001

Approach Terminals Solution 1lsquoCrash Cushionrsquobull Guardrail ldquoreduced

post spacingrdquo to reduce required hazard setback per FDM Table 21542

bull Again contact Central Office for guidance for such limited space

Concrete Barrier Index 521-001 Crash Cushion 544-001

Approach Terminals Solution 2lsquoConcrete Barrierrsquo amp lsquoCrash Cushionrsquo

bull Requires project-specific design

bull Contact Central Office for guidance for such limited space

Questions

Richard Stepp PEStandard Plans Engineer

Central Office Roadway Design(850) 414-4313

richardsteppdotstateflus

Standard Plans Single-Slope Barriers

Page 56: Roadside Barriers - MASH Implementation Update & Design ... · Roadside Barriers - Lessons Learned 1. GUARDRAIL Standard Plans, Index 536-001 2. CONCRETE BARRIER Standard Plans, Index

Guardrail Index 536-001

Approach Terminals Any issue hereYES

Fourth issuehellipldquoTrailing Anchoragerdquo not properly extended downstream of hazard

25-foot Requirement SPI C1 amp lsquoLONrsquo Design Tool (Excel)hellip

AnswerhellipFrom lsquoLength of Needrsquo Excel Sheethellip

Guardrail Index 536-001 Crash Cushion Index 544-001

Approach Terminals Solution 1lsquoCrash Cushionrsquobull ldquoSystem Widthrdquo ndash

lsquoWidersquo per SPI 544-001 Part C

bull ldquoLength Restrictionrdquo - per SPI 544-001 Part F

bull Contact Central Office for guidance

Note Define Crash Cushion with provided CADD cellhellipldquoSummary of Permanent Crash Cushions Tablerdquo

Guardrail Index 536-001 Crash Cushion Index 544-001

Approach Terminals Solution 1lsquoCrash Cushionrsquobull Guardrail ldquoreduced

post spacingrdquo to reduce required hazard setback per FDM Table 21542

bull Again contact Central Office for guidance for such limited space

Concrete Barrier Index 521-001 Crash Cushion 544-001

Approach Terminals Solution 2lsquoConcrete Barrierrsquo amp lsquoCrash Cushionrsquo

bull Requires project-specific design

bull Contact Central Office for guidance for such limited space

Questions

Richard Stepp PEStandard Plans Engineer

Central Office Roadway Design(850) 414-4313

richardsteppdotstateflus

Standard Plans Single-Slope Barriers

Page 57: Roadside Barriers - MASH Implementation Update & Design ... · Roadside Barriers - Lessons Learned 1. GUARDRAIL Standard Plans, Index 536-001 2. CONCRETE BARRIER Standard Plans, Index

Guardrail Index 536-001 Crash Cushion Index 544-001

Approach Terminals Solution 1lsquoCrash Cushionrsquobull ldquoSystem Widthrdquo ndash

lsquoWidersquo per SPI 544-001 Part C

bull ldquoLength Restrictionrdquo - per SPI 544-001 Part F

bull Contact Central Office for guidance

Note Define Crash Cushion with provided CADD cellhellipldquoSummary of Permanent Crash Cushions Tablerdquo

Guardrail Index 536-001 Crash Cushion Index 544-001

Approach Terminals Solution 1lsquoCrash Cushionrsquobull Guardrail ldquoreduced

post spacingrdquo to reduce required hazard setback per FDM Table 21542

bull Again contact Central Office for guidance for such limited space

Concrete Barrier Index 521-001 Crash Cushion 544-001

Approach Terminals Solution 2lsquoConcrete Barrierrsquo amp lsquoCrash Cushionrsquo

bull Requires project-specific design

bull Contact Central Office for guidance for such limited space

Questions

Richard Stepp PEStandard Plans Engineer

Central Office Roadway Design(850) 414-4313

richardsteppdotstateflus

Standard Plans Single-Slope Barriers

Page 58: Roadside Barriers - MASH Implementation Update & Design ... · Roadside Barriers - Lessons Learned 1. GUARDRAIL Standard Plans, Index 536-001 2. CONCRETE BARRIER Standard Plans, Index

Guardrail Index 536-001 Crash Cushion Index 544-001

Approach Terminals Solution 1lsquoCrash Cushionrsquobull Guardrail ldquoreduced

post spacingrdquo to reduce required hazard setback per FDM Table 21542

bull Again contact Central Office for guidance for such limited space

Concrete Barrier Index 521-001 Crash Cushion 544-001

Approach Terminals Solution 2lsquoConcrete Barrierrsquo amp lsquoCrash Cushionrsquo

bull Requires project-specific design

bull Contact Central Office for guidance for such limited space

Questions

Richard Stepp PEStandard Plans Engineer

Central Office Roadway Design(850) 414-4313

richardsteppdotstateflus

Standard Plans Single-Slope Barriers

Page 59: Roadside Barriers - MASH Implementation Update & Design ... · Roadside Barriers - Lessons Learned 1. GUARDRAIL Standard Plans, Index 536-001 2. CONCRETE BARRIER Standard Plans, Index

Concrete Barrier Index 521-001 Crash Cushion 544-001

Approach Terminals Solution 2lsquoConcrete Barrierrsquo amp lsquoCrash Cushionrsquo

bull Requires project-specific design

bull Contact Central Office for guidance for such limited space

Questions

Richard Stepp PEStandard Plans Engineer

Central Office Roadway Design(850) 414-4313

richardsteppdotstateflus

Standard Plans Single-Slope Barriers

Page 60: Roadside Barriers - MASH Implementation Update & Design ... · Roadside Barriers - Lessons Learned 1. GUARDRAIL Standard Plans, Index 536-001 2. CONCRETE BARRIER Standard Plans, Index

Questions

Richard Stepp PEStandard Plans Engineer

Central Office Roadway Design(850) 414-4313

richardsteppdotstateflus

Standard Plans Single-Slope Barriers