Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35888396›Full record

ArticleMaterials (Basel, Switzerland)2022

Influence of a Lighting Column in the Working Width of a W-Beam Barrier on TB51 Crash Test.

Radoslaw Wolny, Dawid Bruski, Marcin Budzyński, Lukasz Pachocki, Krzysztof Wilde

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Materials (Basel, Switzerland), 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Radoslaw WolnyDepartment of Mechanics of Materials and Structures, Faculty of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Gdansk University of Technology, 80-233 Gdansk, Poland.ORCID 0000-0002-1408-2815
Dawid BruskiDepartment of Mechanics of Materials and Structures, Faculty of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Gdansk University of Technology, 80-233 Gdansk, Poland.ORCID 0000-0003-1598-3911
Marcin BudzyńskiDepartment of Highway and Transportation Engineering, Faculty of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Gdansk University of Technology, 80-233 Gdansk, Poland.ORCID 0000-0002-0483-5203
Lukasz PachockiDepartment of Mechanics of Materials and Structures, Faculty of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Gdansk University of Technology, 80-233 Gdansk, Poland.ORCID 0000-0003-1286-6621
Krzysztof WildeDepartment of Mechanics of Materials and Structures, Faculty of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Gdansk University of Technology, 80-233 Gdansk, Poland.ORCID 0000-0001-6878-3126

Funding

General Director for National Roads and Motorways DZP/RID-I-67/13/NCBR/2016National Centre for Research and Development DZP/RID-I-67/13/NCBR/2016
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Road equipment, such as, e.g., road safety barriers and lighting columns, are subject to certification according to the EN1317 standard to be allowed for use on European roads. In engineering practice, due to the terrain conditions, there are cases where other road equipment is installed within the working width of road safety barriers. Such situations are not considered during the certification process. Hence, the aim of this study is to analyze the effect of a lighting column installed within the working width of the barrier on the results of the TB51 crash test. The full-scale crash test and numerical simulation of this event were conducted. In the full-scale crash test, as well as in the simulation, the lighting column prevented the barrier's post from properly disconnecting from the guardrail, which resulted in the barrier failing to restrain and redirect the 13-t bus. The simulation was quantitatively compared to the experiment, where the correlation coefficient of ASI curves equaled 84%. The THIV curves differed significantly between the experiment and the simulation, which is explained within the paper. Next, simulations with and without the lighting column were compared. The ASI and THIV in the simulation without the column were 0.33 and 16.1 km/h, respectively. In the simulation with the column, the ASI and THIV were 0.44 and 17.7 km/h, respectively. The maximum roll angle of the vehicle in the simulation without the column was 2.01° and with the column was 5.96°. The main difference, however, was that the system without the lighting column within the working width of the barrier was capable of properly restraining and redirecting the vehicle. The specific mechanics underlying this behavior are described within the paper.

Indexed as

field and numerical testspassive safetyroad barriersroad safety

Identifiers

PMID35888396
PMCPMC9324466

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.