Click to edit Master text styles. Austroads Safety Barrier Assessment Panel Industry Forum August 2018

Transcription

1 Austroads Safety Barrier Assessment Panel Industry Forum August 2018

2 David Francis Chief Operating Officer Austroads

3 Welcome to the 2018 ASBAP Industry Forum TOPICS Transition to MASH Lantra Update Interaction of Bull Bars and Safety Barriers Transitions Motorcyclist Protection Products Submission Process

4 Austroads Program Structure

5 Austroads Safety Barrier Assessment Panel Operates under the patronage of Austroads. Reports to the Austroads Board via the Safety Program. The Austroads Board endorses the assessment process undertaken and decisions made by the Panel. The Panel s process is in line with the Austroads Board s Towards Zero strategy: Incorporating the Safe System approach

6 TRANSITION TO MASH Jade Hogan Acting Chair Austroads Safety Barrier Assessment Panel

7 Transition to MASH TRANSITION DATES Steel Rail and Permanent Concrete Barriers Terminals Wire Rope Barriers and Crash Cushions Transitions, Temporary Barriers, Part 2 Products

8 MASH Reference Points What are the MASH reference points? Crash energy, including speed and impact angle Vehicle type (weight, class, centre of gravity, age, etc) Any missing tests Test article (length, installation and soil conditions, etc)

9 Existing Approved Products - Permanent What happens to NCHRP350 permanent products that have not been submitted for assessment against MASH protocols?

10 Existing Installed Permanent Products What happens to existing installations post transition dates? Installed based on their original design objectives.

11 Public Domain Products What happens to Public Domain Products Post Transition Dates? Not assessed by Panel therefore No Austroads Status

12 Existing Approved Products - Temporary What happens to NCHRP350 temporary products that have not been submitted for assessment against MASH protocols?

13 Motorcycle Protection Devices What Click to edit testing Master text is styles expected for Motorcycle Protection Devices?

14 Transition to MASH - Harmonisation Jurisdictional Position Main Roads Western Australia Department Of Infrastructure Planning & Logistics Department Of Planning, Transport & Infrastructure Department of Transport and Main Roads Roads & Maritime Services VicRoads Roads ACT New Zealand Transport Agency Department Of Infrastructure Energy & Resources

15 Transition to MASH Q & A

16 LANTRA UPDATE Daniel Cassar Chair Lantra Working Party

17 Lantra Status Update Background Click to edit Master / History text styles The need for a National Road Safety Barrier Accreditation Scheme was identified approximately 7 years ago due to a history of non-conforming barrier design, installation and maintenance practises. Members of Austroads & Australasian Road Authorities sought resolution to address the issue. Industries passion and drive for improvement in installation, maintenance and design practices was paramount, volunteering its time to present a case to Austroads and road authorities. That work identified Lantra as the Australasian administrator of the scheme. Lantra is a non for profit organisation based in UK, recognised for their expertise in developing nationalised quality training and qualifications systems, for land based and environmental sectors, including the UK National Highway Sector Scheme & Highway Maintenance. On 4 July 2017 Austroads entered into an agreement with Lantra to bring a scheme to the shores of Australasia.

18 Lantra Status Update Committee Formation of the committee has undertaken approximately 1 year and was made effective in June The role of the committee is to guide Lantra on behalf of Austroads in the development and implementation of the nationalised training and accreditation scheme. The committee includes a wide compliment of industry specific representatives, who are from the Austroads Safety Barrier Assessment Panel (ASBAP), State road agencies, engineering & auditing practises, product manufacturers & suppliers and installation contractors. The temporary barrier industry is also represented. The committee held its first meeting with Lantra on 15 June 2018 and since then, has been actively reviewing and providing guidance on the finalisation of training modules, accreditation framework, Register Training Organisation (RTO) engagement and program deliverables.

19 Lantra Status Update Key Click Agenda to edit Master Items text styles At the first committee meeting on June 15 th 2018, the following agenda items were discussed with Lantra: Scheme documentation & implementation; terminology/definition of roles, the scope of quality assurance practice for industry disciplines and the role of the state road authorities Review of Lantra training material content for operators & installers. Proposed roll out and transitional arrangements, including the implementation of training modules and state specific requirements. Future steps for state road authorities to facilitate its implementation. Stakeholder engagement and communications.

20 Lantra Status Update Noteworthy Click to edit discussions Master text styles Product training module delivered by RTOs should include any state specific product variants, irrespective of where the training is held. The concept of installation teams known as gangs in the UK need to be discussed. Training modules should be packaged with similar products. Training content and completion requirements need to be tailored to industry participant needs (e.g. installers). Bringing on board other Australian state road authorities not part of the committee, should be made aware of progress. Industry bodies such as Traffic Management Association of Australia should be engaged to expand communication coverage.

21 Lantra Status Update Timeline June 2018 Official Newsletter First Committee Meeting Commence Proprietary Training development July - August 2018 Post Meeting Review Conclusion Post Meeting Review Commence - Registered Training Organisation (RTO) Identification September 2018 Monthly Newsletter Release commences Finalise Operative & Installer Training Scheme Roll Out Plan Finalise Proprietary System Training October 2018 Second Committee Meeting Inform Committee on: Proprietary training packages RTO Updated December 2018 Third Committee Meeting Release of: Designer Training Electronic Logbook Inform Steering Committee on: RTO & EQA Updated January 2019 Fourth Committee Meeting Finalise: Designer Training Electronic Logbook RTOs & EQAs Commence Design Training development Environmental & Quality Assurance EQA Entity Identification Begin

22 Lantra Status Update Future Click to Goals edit Master text styles Time of the next committee meeting is expected to occur within the final quarter of By the next meeting, the key items to be discussed are: Gang Structure & Role Descriptions (e.g. Installers) Training Modules Packages Accreditation Management System Identification of appropriate RTOs Quality Assurance Framework & Governance Structure Finalisation and Implementation of Roll Out Transition Plan

23 INTERACTION BETWEEN BULL BARS & SAFETY BARRIERS Bruce Snook Panel Member Austroads Safety Barrier Assessment Panel

24 INTERACTION BETWEEN BULL BARS & SAFETY BARRIERS Concerns were first raised following incident on Mitchell Freeway on 4 January, 2018 when the driver of a Toyota Hilux utility fell asleep and impacted the TL4 wire rope safety barrier in the median.

25 Interaction between Bull Bars and Safety Barriers Incident occurred on a straight section of Mitchell Freeway which had been open to traffic since Click to August edit Master text styles

26 Interaction between Bull Bars and Safety Barriers

27 Interaction between Bull Bars and Safety Barriers

28 Interaction between Bull Bars and Safety Barriers Vehicle breached barrier, rolled, impacted a railway electrical pole and came to rest across railway lines located in the median

29 Interaction between Bull Bars and Safety Barriers Click Driver to edit received Master only text styles minor injuries. Two passenger trains were narrowly missed. Incident was report to the National Rail Safety Regulator. Road authority (Main Roads WA) responsible for the design and installation of barrier as part of freeway construction project (completed August 2017). Rail authority (Public Transport Authority) asset owner of the median barrier. Independent report commissioned.

30 Interaction between Bull Bars and Safety Barriers Vehicle was a 2017 Hilux SR5 4x4 Double-Cab Pick-Up A trailer containing tiles, mortar, cement mixer etc was being towed

31 Interaction between Bull Bars and Safety Barriers Road and rail authorities recognised that although crash outcome was minor injuries, different Click to timing edit Master may have text resulted styles in a catastrophic outcome. Report found that the wire rope safety barrier had been successfully crash tested with an 8 tonne truck but that a much smaller vehicle had breached the barrier. Report found the Hilux had travelled over the wire ropes and this was most likely caused by the fitting of a (Toyota) bull bar. Report found that interaction between barriers and bull bars had not been investigated and documented in international literature, possibly due to the relatively low % of international vehicles fitted with bull bars.

32 Interaction between Bull Bars and Safety Barriers Vehicle was fitted with a Toyota Premium Steel Bull Bar

33 Interaction between Bull Bars and Safety Barriers Interaction between Bull Bars and Safety Barriers No evidence of wire ropes engaging with vehicle panels. Possible scraping from wire ropes on lower section of bull bar

34 Interaction between Bull Bars and Safety Barriers Wire ropes engaging with crash test vehicles

35 Interaction between Bull Bars and Safety Barriers Report did not include a crash reconstruction, but evidence indicates that vehicle travelled over the four wire ropes.

36 Interaction between Bull Bars and Safety Barriers CASR study reported that 45% of 4WDs and SUVs and 50% of work utilities in Adelaide metro area are fitted with bull bars. Design of vehicle attachments such as bull bars are subject to Australian design rules and AS (which concentrates on the effect on vulnerable road users). There is no guidance for manufacturers or road authorities on the effect of bull bars on vehicle barrier interaction. Panel to propose a research project to the Austroads Board to investigate the interactions between Bull Bars and Safety Barriers.

37 TRANSITIONS Daniel Naish Panel Member Austroads Safety Barrier Assessment Panel

38 Transitions Where there is a structural connection between systems of different stiffness. The transition component gradually increases or decreases in stiffness, or remains constant. The transition: Connection points must be as strong as the approach barrier. Should consider the possibility of being impacted in the reverse direction. Should be long enough so that gradual changes in deflection are managed appropriately (no sudden changes in deflection).

39 Transitions theory Stiffness (kj/m) Deflection (m) 0 Point of Redirection (System Specific) Terminal Stiffness Transition (Product Specific) Lower Deflection Longitudinal Barrier Stiffness Transition (Product Specific) Terminal Point of Redirection (System Specific)

40 Review of Public Domain Road Safety Barrier Transitions Project Click to Need edit Master text styles 1. All Austroads Members have different transition arrangements. Consistency is desired. 2. Public Domain transitions designs in Australia/New Zealand have not been crash tested to current standards. Confidence in public domain transitions is desired.

41 Project Objectives The objective of this project is to: a) Review existing public domain transitions across Australia and New Zealand. b) Design a harmonized public domain transition with the aim of compliance with current standards (i.e. MASH). c) Determine suitability of the proposed transition in accordance with AS/NZS :2015. d) Conduct compliance crash testing of the designed transition.

42 Project Stages Stage 1: Literature Review & Review of Current Status (August / September 2018) Stage 2: Design a Harmonised Transition System (October / November 2018) Optional Stages Stage 3: Crash Testing (February 2019) Stage 4: Dissemination of Results to Road Authorities (March 2019) Stage 5: Dissemination of Results to Industry (May 2019)

43 Lantra, Interaction with Bull Bars & Transitions

44 MOTORCYCLE PROTECTION PRODUCTS Evan Coulson Panel Member Austroads Safety Barrier Assessment Panel

45 Motorcyclist safety In Click Australia to edit each Master year text approximately styles 88 motorcyclists die from striking a fixed object, including approximately 15 motorcyclists who die from striking a road safety barrier. Motorcycle fatalities and serious injuries constitute a significant proportion of the road trauma. In a Safe System, the roadside should be forgiving for all users and should not punish mistakes with serious injury or death. We need motorcyclist protection products that can; Reduce the risk of road safety barriers, protect riders from roadside hazards, and reduce the severity of roadside hazards

46 Motorcyclist products - Trial In Click the to past, edit most Master motorcyclist text styles protection products were developed based on engineering judgement to 'improve' the safety for errant motorcyclists. With a goal to improve motorcyclist safety, Australian and New Zealand road authorities trialled products on high risk motorcyclist routes, such as: Steel & plastic continuous protection devices Foam impact cushions for sign posts and WRSB posts While these products were considered an improvement, without a test protocol most did not have crash testing to demonstrate acceptable motorcyclist performance or how they may effect vehicle performance.

47 Motorcyclist test protocols - Current What Click to test edit protocols Master text are styles available? In 2008, a testing standard for motorcyclists into barrier was developed for use in Europe (CEN/TS ). an ATD propelled into a barrier at an angle of 30 and an impact speed of 60 km/h. Included tests for continuous and discontinuous products (e.g. cushions). In 2015, AS/NZS included this protocol as a relevant standard to evaluate risk to riders, and recommended an additional thorax compression criterion. The inclusion of this test protocol lead to the development and crash testing of a number of continuous protection products. Two products have been accepted and are commonly used in Australia and New Zealand.

48 Motorcyclist crashes into barrier What Click to impact edit Master types are text actually styles occurring? In 2013, Grzebieta, Bambach, and McIntosh reported that of 78 fatal motorcycle-barrier crashes in Australia and New Zealand; Ejected Unknow n 47% - the motorcyclist was in the upright posture and collided with the barrier while seated on the motorcycle, 44% - the motorcycle falls to the roadway and the motorcyclist and motorcycle slide along the road surface and into the barrier, 6% - the motorcycle came into contact with the gutter (three cases) or an object (two cases) and the motorcycle rapidly decelerated, ejecting the motorcyclist forward from the motorcycle and into or onto the barrier, 3% - the impact type could not be determined (unknown). Sliding Upright

49 Motorcyclist test protocols - Needed There is need for a test protocol for an upright motorcyclist impact and an impact into frangible roadside products.

50 ELECTRONIC SUBMISSION PROCESS Jade Hogan Acting Panel Chair Austroads Safety Barrier Assessment Panel

51 Electronic Submission Process Austroads have approved funding for an electronic submission portal.

52 Electronic Submission Process

53 Electronic Submission Process John Doe Company A Company A Company A Company A

54 Motorcyclist Protection & Electronic Submission

55 ASBAP 2018 Industry Forum Feedback

56 The Austroads Safety Barrier Assessment Panel wishes to thank you for your attendance.

57 Networking & Tea/Coffee