Occupant Risk Analysis for Guardrail Roadside Safety Barrier Systems: Analysis and Evaluation of Full Scale Crash Tests

Collision with roadside objects such as trees, utilities and guardrail are a major road-safety problem and reported the highest rate of side-impact accidents on roadways in which about 225,000 people have been involved. In this study the common methods to evaluate occupant risk factors involving in crash to roadside barrier systems are reviewed. The collected previous real crash test on guardrail system with regards to occupant impact risk factors are prepared based on different system performance. Higher average for longitudinal impact velocity for Thrie-beam system is found. On the other hand, Weak-post system is provided less severe system in terms of longitudinal impact velocity.

[1]  John D. Reid.  Approach Slopes for Midwest Guardrail System , 2009 .

[2]  Xiaoyu Zhu,et al.  Modeling occupant-level injury severity: An application to large-truck crashes. , 2011, Accident; analysis and prevention.

[3]  Wanda L Menges,et al.  EVALUATION OF A MODIFIED STEEL POST W-BEAM GUARDRAIL SYSTEM , 1997 .

[4]  Dean L Sicking,et al.  Midwest Guardrail System for Long-Span Culvert Applications , 2007 .

[5]  Douglas J Gabauer,et al.  Comparison of roadside crash injury metrics using event data recorders. , 2008, Accident; analysis and prevention.

[6]  D Otte,et al.  Kinematics and injury pattern in rollover accidents of cars in German road traffic – an in-depth-analysis by GIDAS , 2005 .

[7]  Malcolm H. Ray,et al.  Unreported Collisions with Post-and-Beam Guardrails in Connecticut, Iowa, and North Carolina , 2001 .

[8]  Dean L Sicking,et al.  Development and Evaluation of a Tie-Down System for the Redesigned F-Shape Concrete Temporary Barrier , 2003 .

[9]  Steven Reed,et al.  Characteristics of fatal single-vehicle crashes in Europe , 2012 .

[10]  Roger P Bligh,et al.  TESTING OF STATE ROADSIDE SAFETY SYSTEMS. VOLUME XI: APPENDIX J - CRASH TESTING AND EVALUATION OF EXISTING GUARDRAIL SYSTEMS , 1990 .

[11]  Malcolm H Ray,et al.  Repeatability of Full-Scale Crash Tests and Criteria for Validating Simulation Results , 1996 .

[12]  Anders Ydenius,et al.  Frontal crash severity in different road environments measured in real-world crashes , 2009 .

[13]  Wanda L Menges,et al.  NCHRP Report 350 Test 3-10 on the Modified PennDOT Type 2 Guide Rail. Test 4 , 2000 .

[14]  Chuck A. Plaxico,et al.  Design, Development, and Qualification of New Guardrail Post , 2006 .

[15]  Dean L Sicking,et al.  Midwest Guardrail System for Standard and Special Applications , 2004 .

[16]  Chuck A. Plaxico,et al.  Impact Performance of the G4(1W) and G4(2W) Guardrail Systems: Comparison Under NCHRP Report 350 Test 3-11 Conditions , 2000 .

[17]  J D Michie.  COLLISION RISK ASSESSMENT BASED ON OCCUPANT FLAIL-SPACE MODEL , 1981 .

[18]  Ronald K Faller,et al.  Development of the Midwest Guardrail System for Standard and Reduced Post Spacing and in Combination With Curbs: Part Two , 2008 .

[19]  Malcolm H Ray,et al.  Side-Impact Crash Test and Evaluation Criteria for Roadside Safety Hardware , 1998 .

[20]  Young-Jun Kweon,et al.  Driver injury severity: an application of ordered probit models. , 2002, Accident; analysis and prevention.

[21]  Wanda L Menges,et al.  Dynamic response of guardrail systems encased in pavement mow strips , 2004 .

[22]  Guangyu Yang,et al.  Investigation of 184 passenger car–pedestrian accidents , 2010 .

[23]  Dean L Sicking,et al.  Performance of Steel-Post, W-Beam Guardrail Systems , 2007 .

[24]  R A Zimmer,et al.  RECOMMENDED PROCEDURES FOR THE SAFETY PERFORMANCE EVALUATION OF HIGHWAY FEATURES , 1993 .

[25]  Robert Thomson,et al.  Single-vehicle collisions in Europe: analysis using real-world and crash-test data , 2008 .