Citation

Kennedy J. Transp. Res. Rec. 1997; 1599: 32-39.

Copyright

(Copyright © 1997, Transportation Research Board, National Research Council, National Academy of Sciences USA, Publisher SAGE Publishing)

DOI

10.3141/1599-04

PMID

unavailable

Abstract

Light poles installed within the deflection zone of roadside barriers (guardrails) may influence the ability of the guardrail to safely redirect an impacting vehicle. One concern is that, during an impact, the vehicle may pivot about the relatively rigid light pole and then spin away from the guardrail back into the traffic stream in an uncontrolled, unsafe manner. A large percentage of the highway network in Ohio uses the type of guardrail and light pole configurations, in which the breakaway light poles are placed at either 15.2- or 45.7-cm (6- or 18-in.) lateral distance from the back of the guardrail, depending on one of two light pole base designs in use. These pole-guardrail systems were placed in large numbers some years ago and Ohio accident data have been inadequate to provide information to determine whether or not a problem exists with this system. Proposed highway rehabilitation and reconstruction projects can include changes or adjustments to placement of guardrails and light poles, but there was a lack of information as to whether or not the past practices possessed a problem. A study was conducted to determine if light poles have an adverse effect on the redirecting performance of guardrails. It included six full-scale crash tests involving two vehicle weight classes (2000P and 820C), two light pole base designs (AT-A and AT-X), and a typical guardrail used in Ohio [Type 5 (W-Beam)]. All full-scale tests were carried out according to the recommended procedures in National Cooperative Highway Research Program (NCHRP) Report 350. The actual vehicles used for the 2000P class were half-ton pickup trucks ballasted to simulate the weight and mass characteristics of the 2000P vehicle that is specified in NCHRP Report 350. The guardrail-light pole system was not shown to cause snagging or subsequent unstable motion of the vehicle due to impact. All vehicles exited the guardrail in a stable manner. No change in the arrangement of light poles behind the Type 5 guardrail is contemplated. The redirecting function of the guardrail was not compromised as a result of placement of the light pole behind the length-of-need. Excessive exit angle situations (according to NCHRP Report 350) occurred in three tests involving the simulated 2000P class vehicles. However, the impact conditions employed for these tests were extreme, and the likelihood of this situation occurring under everyday highway usage may be small.