<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="https://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>Research in Progress (RIP)</title>
    <link>https://rip.trb.org/</link>
    <atom:link href="https://rip.trb.org/Record/RSS?s=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" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
    <description></description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <copyright>Copyright © 2026. National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.</copyright>
    <docs>http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/tech/rss</docs>
    <managingEditor>tris-trb@nas.edu (Bill McLeod)</managingEditor>
    <webMaster>tris-trb@nas.edu (Bill McLeod)</webMaster>
    
    <item>
      <title>Evaluating the Influence of Vehicle Active Safety Technologies on Roadway Departures</title>
      <link>https://rip.trb.org/View/2558379</link>
      <description><![CDATA[Advanced driver assistance systems (ADAS), such as automatic emergency braking (AEB), lane departure warning (LDW), lane keeping assist (LKA), and electronic stability control (ESC), have become increasingly prevalent in the U.S. vehicle fleet. However, it remains uncertain how ADAS technologies affect vehicle dynamics during roadway departure crashes, including those involving roadside safety hardware. For example, AEB systems, which are designed to reduce rear-end crashes, may also reduce approach speeds during impacts with breakaway devices or trigger hard braking that compresses a vehicle’s front suspension, lowering the front bumper before it impacts a barrier. Likewise, LDW and LKA may influence the frequency and departure angles of roadway departure crashes.

Research is needed to better understand how ADAS technologies influence passenger vehicle roadway departures and impact conditions, and whether updates to the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO) Manual for Assessing Safety Hardware (MASH) or other publications are warranted.

The objective of this research is to quantify how current ADAS technologies in passenger vehicles influence roadway departures, impact conditions, vehicle interaction with roadside safety hardware, and the performance of roadside safety hardware systems. ]]></description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 29 May 2025 12:38:47 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://rip.trb.org/View/2558379</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Device to Optimize Crashworthiness of Breakaway Sign Support System to Meet AASHTO MASH</title>
      <link>https://rip.trb.org/View/2505728</link>
      <description><![CDATA[This project will develop a device that will improve the crashworthiness of small sign breakaway support systems. The majority of these systems have not been successfully tested to the guidelines of the AASHTO Manual for Assessing Safety Hardware (MASH). The most common observed crash testing failure is the sign panels and sign support rotating into the windshield and roof and causing excessive deformation or penetration of the occupant compartment. The device to be developed in this project will attach to the small sign support system to change the rotation and trajectory of the breakaway components after an impact so that the breakaway components do not strike the windshield or the rear window or the roof of the impacting vehicle. The device is expected to work on a wide variety of existing breakaway sign support configurations. The behavior of existing sign supports will be adjusted by optimizing size, mass, and location of the device through simulated tests. The results of simulated tests will be validated through crash tests with a small car and a pickup truck surrogate vehicles and one or two sign support system configuration(s) with the prototype device attached. If successful, the mass and height of the mass necessary for each configuration to produce a crashworthy behavior will be determined. The results will be input into a program so that the mass and height can be calculated for any configuration.   ]]></description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 03 Feb 2025 22:23:45 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://rip.trb.org/View/2505728</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Application of MASH Test Criteria to Breakaway Sign and Luminaire Supports and Crashworthy Work Zone Traffic Control Devices



</title>
      <link>https://rip.trb.org/View/2433905</link>
      <description><![CDATA[Recent crash testing of small and medium sign supports and work-zone devices has been problematic for both of the test vehicles required in the 2009 AASHTO Manual for Assessing Safety Hardware (MASH). Many of these designs have previously been successfully full-scale crash tested under NCHRP Report 350: Recommended Procedures for the Safety Performance Evaluation of Highway Features. Only the small car (1800-lb, Geo Metro or similar) test was performed under NCHRP Report 350. MASH requires testing with both a small car (2420-lb, Kia Rio or similar) and a pickup truck (5000-lb, ½-ton Dodge Quad Cab or similar) into these types of devices. Occupant Impact Velocities (OIVs) and Occupant Ride-Down Accelerations (ORAs) have not been a problem because of the increased weight of the test vehicles, even with the commensurate reduction in impact speed in MASH Test 3-60. However, the change in frontal geometry (i.e., bumper heights, increased frontal area, and wrap around distances) and increased ground clearance has changed the interaction between the vehicle and object struck. In general, small and medium sign supports used to pass over the top of the impacting vehicle with limited or no vehicle contact. With the newer MASH test vehicles, sign supports are now striking the windshield and roof of the test vehicles and failing the occupant compartment intrusion and/or penetration requirements of MASH. Similarly, vehicle collisions with portable work-zone devices are causing unacceptable windshield and roof penetrations and/or deformations as well as floor pan penetrations. No testing has been conducted to date on luminaires (light poles) under MASH, but this recent testing on other breakaway and portable work-zone devices raises questions as to the expected performance of breakaway luminaire poles under the MASH impact safety criteria. The addition of objective vehicle intrusion and deformation criteria has also brought into question the future usefulness of pendulum/bogie testing of breakaway and crashworthy designs.
 

The objective of this research is to identify and evaluate the crash performance of breakaway sign and luminaire supports and crashworthy work-zone traffic control devices that are non-proprietary and commonly used. The evaluation should address their in-service safety performance, potential failure modes (and, if possible, design modifications that might address those failure modes), and their likelihood to comply with the current MASH crash test criteria.
]]></description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 23 Sep 2024 17:40:19 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://rip.trb.org/View/2433905</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Investigation and Validation of V-Ditch Traversability Related to Crash Testing Cable Barrier Systems</title>
      <link>https://rip.trb.org/View/2381739</link>
      <description><![CDATA[The 2016 American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO) Manual for Assessing Safety Hardware (MASH) provides full-scale test matrices for evaluating cable median barriers on level terrain and sloped median ditches. The matrices define the critical placement of cable barriers and test criteria for 4:1 (horizontal to vertical slope) and 6:1 V-ditches to evaluate the safety performance of cable median barriers. Recent full-scale crash testing of cable median barriers under the conditions described in MASH Test No. 3-16 have produced varying results for the stability of small vehicles traversing 4:1 V-ditches.

MASH Test No. 3-16 uses a 46-ft-wide V-ditch as measured from slope break point to slope break point, with the cable barrier test article placed 4 ft from the slope break point on the far side of the V-ditch. However, small vehicles have experienced inconsistent stability while traversing the 4:1 V-ditches during crash testing, and the AASHTO Roadside Design Guide (RDG) notes that 4:1 V-ditches are not a preferred configuration for median V-ditches. This raises concerns that the traversability of the V-ditch configuration used in MASH 2016 may be near the limit of vehicle stability.

Research is needed to investigate the traversability of 4:1 V-ditches to verify if the current configuration specified in MASH Test No. 3-16 produces sufficient vehicle stability for consistent and reliable test article impact conditions.

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this research is to investigate the traversability of 4:1 V-ditches for crash testing of cable median barrier systems.

]]></description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 22 May 2024 11:49:24 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://rip.trb.org/View/2381739</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Examination of Current U.S. and EU Crash Test Evaluation Criteria for Sign and Luminaire Support Structures and Work Zone Devices</title>
      <link>https://rip.trb.org/View/2381718</link>
      <description><![CDATA[The American Association of State Highway Transportation Officials (AASHTO) Manual for Assessing Safety Hardware (MASH) provides guidelines for crash testing roadside features and evaluation criteria to assess the test results. Using the philosophy of the “state of the possible,” the developers of MASH set lower occupant impact velocity (OIV) limits for sign and luminaire support structures and work zone devices than other roadside features because of the assumed relative ease in obtaining compliant test results for breakaway devices. The OIV limits are 4.9 m/s for all types of supports, whereas the limits for all other highway safety devices are 12.2 m/s. However, developing MASH-compliant devices in these families has proven difficult because of the conservative change in velocity requirements as well as occupant compartment deformation and penetration criteria. 

The current occupant risk criteria for these families of devices may preclude the use of energy-absorbing devices (e.g., poles, signs), which might ultimately be more conducive to favorable real-world crash outcomes in some applications. Energy-absorbing support structures are designed to decelerate a vehicle rather than allow it to break through with minimal speed reduction. Europe has developed a test standard to evaluate supports that uses the entire spectrum of support structures and occupant risk outcomes: EN12767, Passive safety of support structures for road equipment – Requirements and test methods. EN12767 accommodates the evaluation criteria in MASH but expands on possible outcomes based on the type of support structure, such as breakaway or energy-absorbing devices. 

Research is needed to collect available data on these types of devices and examine the test results with current U.S. and European Union (EU) standards to determine how concepts from the EU standards might be incorporated into MASH hardware evaluation.

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this project is to examine current U.S. and EU roadside safety hardware crash test criteria for sign and luminaire support structures and work zone devices and investigate how concepts from EU standards might be suitable for the United States.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Tue, 21 May 2024 16:54:27 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://rip.trb.org/View/2381718</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Development of Critical Impact Point and Impact Angle Guidance for the Manual for Assessing Safety Hardware (MASH)</title>
      <link>https://rip.trb.org/View/2381727</link>
      <description><![CDATA[The American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO) Manual for Assessing Safety Hardware (MASH) provides criteria for full-scale crash testing and evaluation of roadside safety hardware (RSH) devices. As part of an RSH assessment, MASH requires that an RSH device be evaluated at its critical impact point (CIP), critical impact angle (CIA), or both, depending on the device category. The CIP or CIA is defined as the point or angle that maximizes the potential for failure of the device based on structural loading, vehicle stability, vehicle snagging, or other considerations.

While MASH has specific guidance for determining CIPs for several types of barriers (such as post-and-beam longitudinal barriers), CIP or CIA guidance is more general or nonexistent for many classes of RSH devices. In these cases, MASH recommends that CIP and CIA be determined by computer simulation. However, not all test laboratories have computer simulation capabilities, and MASH recognizes that using computer simulation solely to determine CIPs is often not practical. Even if computer simulation is used for this purpose, MASH does not detail what factors to consider in the CIP analysis. The limited procedures for determining critical impact conditions for these safety devices and tests has led to differences in how devices are tested and evaluated at different laboratories. This may result in inconsistent test results.

Research is needed to support state departments of transportation (DOTs) in establishing crash-test procedures for assessing RSH devices in a uniform and consistent manner.


OBJECTIVE: The project objective is to develop and validate procedures to determine CIPs and CIAs to assess the crashworthiness of RSH devices. The project will focus on RSH devices that currently have a range or limited criteria to determine CIPs and CIAs.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Tue, 21 May 2024 16:42:58 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://rip.trb.org/View/2381727</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Advancement of Gender Equity in Transportation Safety, Design, Development, and Evaluation of Roadside Safety Hardware</title>
      <link>https://rip.trb.org/View/2342039</link>
      <description><![CDATA[The American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO) Manual for Assessing Safety Hardware (MASH) provides guidelines for crash testing and evaluating highway safety features. However, these guidelines have predominantly been based on research using a male crash test dummy, resulting in a potential lack of inclusiveness and applicability to a broader group of motorists, specifically female drivers and passengers. This project aims to address this issue by investigating the suitability of the MASH impact safety requirements for a diverse range of motorists and recommending necessary adjustments and considerations. The proposed research will focus on evaluating the existing criteria and determining any potential shortcomings related to the representation of female drivers and passengers. By conducting thorough assessments and performance evaluations of highway safety standards, the project will seek to identify areas where adjustments may be necessary to ensure the safety of all road users, in particular females. The significance of this project lies in its potential to enhance highway safety measures by considering the specific needs and characteristics of female motorists. Specifically, this proposal will investigate the applicability of the current MASH impact safety requirements to female drivers and passengers, identify potential shortcomings, initiate preliminary computer simulations using female and male dummies considering the limitations of time and budget, provide recommendations for areas of adjustments, and provide future research plan to improve the inclusiveness and effectiveness of highway safety devices. By focusing on these specific objectives, this proposal aims to contribute significantly and meaningfully to improving highway safety standards and creating safer and more inclusive transportation infrastructure for all road users.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 19 Feb 2024 18:31:40 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://rip.trb.org/View/2342039</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Development and Evaluation of Box-Beam Barrier Configuration for Shielding Fixed Objects and Bridge Ends in Medians</title>
      <link>https://rip.trb.org/View/2170143</link>
      <description><![CDATA[The objective of this research effort is to develop, crash test, and evaluate the Wyoming Department of Transportation (WYDOT) narrow-median box-beam guardrail system according to the TL-3 safety performance criteria found in the Manual for Assessing Safety Hardware (MASH). The outcome of this study will be a flared, minimal-length, cost-effective, narrow-median box-beam guardrail system. The system will be available for WYDOT and other state DOTs to implement into box-beam standard plans immediately upon project closing. 

Funding of this research effort will bolster two of the goals listed in the WYDOT Guiding Principles. One WYDOT goal achieved by completion of this study is to provide safe, reliable, and effective transportation systems. Installation of the WYDOT narrow-median box-beam barrier system on the roadway will improve occupant safety in two ways. First, the proposed system is flared, which not only reduces the overall length of the system but also moves the system away from the roadway, decreasing the frequency of impact from errant vehicles. Second, if an impact does occur, the system will be designed, tested, and evaluated in a narrow-median configuration to current MASH TL-3 crash test safety criteria. This system will serve as a crashworthy option that currently isn’t included in WYDOT box-beam standard plans.   

The second goal achieved by completion of this study is to encourage and support innovation. Research detailed herein will require the integration of four different roadside safety devices into a single, crashworthy system. This type of barrier configuration poses several challenges that have not been addressed in previous testing of box-beam systems including backside impacts on roadside box-beam guardrail and box-beam end terminals as well as impacts on flared box-beam systems. Innovation will be required to not only to ensure the crashworthiness of these systems tested in different configurations, but also to ensure the transition from one system to another is also crashworthy. 

To reiterate, flared barriers reduce the overall system length and amount of barrier immediately adjacent to the roadway when compared to tangent systems. As such, a flared system improves installation time and efficiency while minimizing labor and material cost. Moreover, because flared systems decrease the frequency of impacts, accident costs and repair costs are also reduced. 
]]></description>
      <pubDate>Fri, 12 May 2023 13:48:11 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://rip.trb.org/View/2170143</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Investigation and Development of a MASH Test Level 6, Cost-Effective Barrier System for Containing Heavy Tractor Tank-Trailer Vehicles and Mitigating Catastrophic Crash Events – Phase V</title>
      <link>https://rip.trb.org/View/1942824</link>
      <description><![CDATA[Following the execution of a Manual for Assessing Safety Hardware (MASH) TL-6 full-scale crash test during the fourth year of this study, a suite of implementation details will be performed to aid state Departments of Transportation (DOTs) to implement the MASH Test Level 6 vehicle containment system into state DOT standard plans. It is anticipated that this barrier will prevent and/or mitigate the consequences of errant heavy tanker-truck vehicles striking opposing traffic on heavily-congested urban freeways and interstates as well as crashes into high-risk facilities or highly-populated areas, such as schools, malls, sports venues, concert arenas, military bases, international airports, or critical government buildings. Further augmentation of the design will be performed including footings for varying soil conditions and to accommodate underground facilities, design for accommodation for bridge sections, and optimization for barrier use in median and single-sided impacts (i.e., median and roadside versions). Load considerations on bridges and for attachments to adjacent features will be identified. Recommendations will be provided to accommodate tapered heights, barrier widths, and changes in barrier geometry outside of the critical length needed for TL-6.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 27 Apr 2022 14:57:11 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://rip.trb.org/View/1942824</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Investigating and Developing a MASH Compliant Contraflow Ramp Closure Gate</title>
      <link>https://rip.trb.org/View/1873849</link>
      <description><![CDATA[The research objective is to investigate the Manual for Assessing Safety Hardware (MASH) crashworthiness of the Louisiana Department of Transportation and Development (LADOTD) ramp closure gate through computer simulation. Using the current LADOTD gate system as a model, this project will evaluate the design according to MASH test numbers 60, 61, and 62 criteria.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 23 Aug 2021 15:31:26 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://rip.trb.org/View/1873849</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>MASH Crashworthiness of Luminaire Poles</title>
      <link>https://rip.trb.org/View/1854202</link>
      <description><![CDATA[No abstract provided.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 27 May 2021 19:16:00 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://rip.trb.org/View/1854202</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Testing of Cable Median Barrier in a Narrow Ditch</title>
      <link>https://rip.trb.org/View/1847748</link>
      <description><![CDATA[With its publication by AASHTO in October 2009, the Manual for Assessing Safety Hardware (MASH) has superseded NCHRP Report 350 as the recommended procedures for the safety performance evaluation of roadside features. The majority of longitudinal barrier crash tests are preformed on flat, level terrain. However, it is recognized that cable median barrier is commonly installed in a median ditch on sloped terrain. This practice accommodates the needed working width of the barrier and helps reduce the frequency of impacts. It is, therefore, desirable to test and evaluate cable median barriers in a ditch.    A question has arisen pertaining to what ditch configurations should be used to evaluate a cable median barrier that is designed to be placed anywhere in any ditch with 4H:1V slopes or flatter. The multitude of ditch configurations that exist in the field makes the selection of appropriate test conditions a challenge. Although a maximum slope is defined (e.g., 4H:1V), other variables include ditch width, shape, and degree of rounding of the hinge points.    Several crash tests have been conducted at the Midwest Roadside Safety Facility (MwRSF) at the University of Nebraska Lincoln (UNL) on a generic cable median barrier being designed for placement anywhere in a 4H:1V ditch. The testing was conducted in a relatively wide (42 ft) ditch and has included a barrier placed at the critical lateral offset on the foreslope and near the ditch bottom on the backslope.    Additional consideration is being given to the evaluation of cable barriers in a narrower (e.g., 30 ft) ditch. The narrower ditch width will result in vehicle interaction with the backslope during redirection.  This interaction may or may not cause the pickup truck to become unstable. There is a need to evaluate and compare performance related to both ditch widths to determine which is more critical for use in future testing.    It has also been observed in previous testing of cable median barriers on the backslope of a narrow ditch, that a passenger car has the propensity to steer up the backslope before impacting the barrier. This behavior can induce a yaw opposite the direction of desired redirection. It has been proposed to further evaluate this test condition through additional testing.  
The objective of this project is to conduct a full-scale crash test of a generic 4-cable median barrier in a narrow ditch with 4H:1V slopes – one on the ditch foreslope with a pickup truck, and one on the ditch backslope with a small car and develop and final matrix for updating and refining the MASH.  
Task 1. Conduct a Manual for Assessing Safety Hardware (MASH) Test 3-11 with a cable barrier placed on a 4H:1V ditch foreslope. (cancelled)   Amended Task 1. Develop cable median barrier test matrices using information from existing testing, simulation, and Delphi method approach.  
Task 2. Conduct a MASH Test 3-10 with a cable barrier placed on a $H:1V ditch backslope.   
Task 3. Submit a final report documenting the research approach and test results. ]]></description>
      <pubDate>Tue, 20 Apr 2021 10:18:49 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://rip.trb.org/View/1847748</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Evaluation of MASH Test Vehicles</title>
      <link>https://rip.trb.org/View/1842749</link>
      <description><![CDATA[The Manual for Assessing Safety Hardware (MASH) requires full-scale crash testing of roadside features using worst practical impact conditions, which are supposed to be representative of the composition of vehicles involved in run-off-road crashes and roadside departure speeds and angles. For this research effort, the composition of the United States vehicle fleet was investigated using three data sources: state Department of Transportation (DOT) crashes; state and national vehicle registrations; and new vehicle sales. New vehicle sales were the most convenient and economical data source, and was determined to be representative of both crash and registration data; therefore analysis was recommended using new vehicle sales. 
A sales-based cumulative distribution for new vehicle weights was used to identify the 5th and 95th percentile weights to update criteria for the 1100C small car and 2270P pickup truck, respectively. The 5th percentile weight was determined to be 2,800 lb and 4-door, gas-powered, base trim candidate small car options were recommended. Relatively few pickup truck options were identified at the 95th percentile weight of 5,850 lb, and because recent 2018 and 2019 model year pickup truck weights were much lower for Chevrolet and Ram models, a 92.5 percentile weight of 5,400 lb was selected, and a pickup truck with four-wheel drive (4WD), ½-ton suspension, and crew cab trim was recommended. Recommendations were provided to update the 1500A mid-size car; it was recommended that compact (crossover) utility vehicles (CUVs) be considered as they accounted for 40% of all new vehicle sales in 2017. A crash test pilot program should be implemented to begin testing of the recommended MASH small and large passenger vehicles. Updated MASH passenger vehicle properties and a method for continually updating vehicle selection criteria are herein recommended.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 24 Mar 2021 10:31:15 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://rip.trb.org/View/1842749</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Crashworthy Foundations for Soil-Embedded Roadside Safety Hardware</title>
      <link>https://rip.trb.org/View/1740337</link>
      <description><![CDATA[Run-off-road crashes with soil-embedded safety hardware, such as luminaire poles and guardrail posts, are not well-understood for soil conditions other than MASH strong soil. The selection of an appropriate foundation depends on several factors including support structure type, structural stiffness, transmitted loads, soil properties, soil-structure interaction, groundwater conditions, and depth to bedrock. This project will primarily focus on the specific application of luminaire pole foundations. Current luminaire pole foundation designs commonly implemented by state DOTs rely on guidance from the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO) LRFD Bridge Design Specifications and AASHTO Standard Specifications for Structural Supports for Highway Signs, Luminaires, and Traffic Signals. These AASHTO guidelines are based on Broms’ method (1964) which relies on static analysis. Designs typically follow static load-based methods (i.e., Brom’s method), which has led to overdesigned foundations. Furthermore, there are no guidelines for design of crashworthy foundations embedded in soils other than medium to dense, dry soil. AASHTO guidelines do not address crashworthy foundation design for sites with “weak” soil (i.e., silts, soft clay, peat, organic soil) and/or soil with high moisture content. Geographic soil variability as well as seasonal variations in groundwater conditions across the country call for research to enable cost-effective and safe soil-embedded safety hardware for an extended array of specific site conditions (i.e., weak, and/or saturated soil) considering more realistic and accurate dynamic loads rather than static loads. The objectives of this research project are to (1) evaluate adequacy of state DOTs’ existing practices, (2) enhance existing modeling methods for soil behavior during vehicle impact events, and (3) develop preliminary guidelines for luminaire foundation depth accounting for soft and/or saturated soil. This project will complement a current project at Midwest Roadside Safety Facility (MwRSF) which aims to develop design guidance for crashworthy luminaire pole foundations in the state of Alaska, satisfying Manual for Assessing Safety Hardware (MASH) safety criteria.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Fri, 26 Feb 2021 10:53:51 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://rip.trb.org/View/1740337</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Impact of Soil Stiffness on the Performance of Crash Testing and Roadside Safety</title>
      <link>https://rip.trb.org/View/1707181</link>
      <description><![CDATA[The American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officiais (AASHTO) Manual for Assessing Safety Hardware (MASH, 2016) contains the testing procedures used to evaluate various roadside safety features. MASH testing guidelines were intended to provide consistent and reproducible tests. One significant change in MASH is the use of standardized soil stiffness to provide consistency in the performance of safety barriers embedded in soil. The development of stiffness criteria was based on testing in various U.S. test facilities utilizing soil criteria described in NCHRP Report 350: Recommended Procedures for the Safety Performance Evaluation of Highway Features, which did not specify soil types or the optimal hardware installations. The MASH specification for soil stiffness defines a minimum stiffness for the response of a standard W6x16 steel post surrogate to dynamic loads for a specified soil type and correlates this response to a static load test to be performed as part of each soil-based crash test. 
Since the implementation of MASH testing, concerns with this new soil stiffness criterion have been noted. The first of these is the lack of a maximum stiffness limit. Highly stiff soils can negatively impact system performance, and there is concern that the lack of an upper stiffness limit does not provide consistent testing between laboratories and various installations. Other potential issues relate to the optimization of the current testing for identifying salient properties of a variety of soils utilized by various crash testing facilities.
Over the past few years, many crash tests have been performed on a variety of systems under MASH criteria. The opportunity to evaluate the efficacy of and potentially improve the new stiffness-based soil criteria is timely and critical to the continued improvement of roadside safety. Since MASH is the standard for evaluation of roadside safety devices, the research could affect state departments of transportation (DOTs) and other transportation agencies. Research is needed to review the current MASH soil specifications and evaluation procedures to ensure consistency in crash testing and develop proposed language for consideration by AASHTO to incorporate the research results in the next update of MASH.
OBJECTIVE: The objective of this research is to evaluate the impact of soil stiffness on the performance of crash testing and roadside safety.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 21 May 2020 10:29:07 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://rip.trb.org/View/1707181</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>