Author
Listed:
- Miguel A Fernández
- Luis Ángel García-Escudero
- Aquilino Molinero
Abstract
Objective: Metal Road Safety Barriers (MRSB) are one of the devices implemented in roadsides to mitigate the consequences of run-off crashes. In Europe, they have to meet the requirements of the European Standard EN-1317-2. This article analyzes a set of run-off crashes against MRSB, for which an in-depth investigation has been performed, comparing them with the standard tests. It has been observed that in many of these real crashes, the barriers have not worked properly in spite of having passed these standard tests. This paper demonstrates which variables may be responsible for this, with the objective of helping to improve the current test standard through the analysis of new test variables. Methods: Multidimensional Scaling, a dimension reduction multivariate statistical technique, has been used to better understand how real crashes compare to standard tests, using several impact variables at the same time. Then, a statistical analysis has been developed to show the influence of the “Relative orientation impact angle” on the performance of the MRSB. Results: Most of the real crashes analyzed are close to “TB11” and “TB32” standard tests. In many of these real crashes, the “Relative orientation impact angle” is very different from the “Impact angle”, and in these situations, the vehicle is not safely redirected to the road concerning the so-called “Exit-Box”. Conclusions: MRSB are not working properly in some situations that are not far from the standard tests. To handle this, it could be interesting to include the “Relative orientation impact angle” as a control variable in new versions of the EN-1317-2 tests to guarantee the behavior of the MRSB. These results can help to adapt some test variables from the EN-1317-2 to what is happening in crashes.
Suggested Citation
Miguel A Fernández & Luis Ángel García-Escudero & Aquilino Molinero, 2019.
"Analysis of real crashes against metal roadside barriers,"
PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(2), pages 1-13, February.
Handle:
RePEc:plo:pone00:0211674
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0211674
Download full text from publisher
Corrections
All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0211674. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.
We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .
If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through
the various RePEc services.