Home Page link

OT - Highway Impact Attenuator Damage

Home| Search | About
Login Password
Register Now! Lost Password?

Home Repair - - If it ain't broken, don't fix it. Otherwise look here. 

Page 1 of 2       1 2 > last >> Bookmark this page:  YahooMyWeb Yahoo!  Google Google  Windows Live Favorites Windows Live  del.icio.us del.icio.us  digg digg  Add to Netscape Netscape
Subject Author Date
OT - Highway Impact Attenuator Damage DerbyDad03 04-28-2008
If you were  Registered and logged in, you could reply and use other advanced thread options
Posted by DerbyDad03 on April 28, 2008, 12:14 pm
Just something I'm curious about...

I assume we've all seen the impact attenuators they put in front of
concrete highway dividers and toll booths - the barrels of sand or
large rubber bumbers. They're supposed to slow a vehicle down so they
don't hit the solid obstruction at full speed.

Why do they mark them with orange cones after they get damaged?

Are they trying to tell drivers not to hit them because they won't
they provide the anticipated protection?

As far as I know, drivers don't typically have the option of choosing
where to have an accident. If we were able to avoid the impact
attenuators when they are marked with cones, don't you think we'd
avoid them at all times?

What's the point of marking them with "caution cones" when no one
would actually consider hitting them even if they weren't damaged?

Posted by Robert Allison on April 28, 2008, 12:37 pm
DerbyDad03 wrote:
> Just something I'm curious about...
>
> I assume we've all seen the impact attenuators they put in front of
> concrete highway dividers and toll booths - the barrels of sand or
> large rubber bumbers. They're supposed to slow a vehicle down so they
> don't hit the solid obstruction at full speed.
>
> Why do they mark them with orange cones after they get damaged?
>
> Are they trying to tell drivers not to hit them because they won't
> they provide the anticipated protection?
>
> As far as I know, drivers don't typically have the option of choosing
> where to have an accident. If we were able to avoid the impact
> attenuators when they are marked with cones, don't you think we'd
> avoid them at all times?
>
> What's the point of marking them with "caution cones" when no one
> would actually consider hitting them even if they weren't damaged?

They are not barrels of sand, but barrels of water. They mark
them for a couple of reasons. One to indicate damage to the
safety devices and to help prepare regular commuters for future
repair crews which will come to replace them. The notice to
drivers is mostly a CYA for the governing authority.

Number two is that at certain times, someone MAY HAVE to choose
where to have an accident. Being one who drags trailers around
in the course of my work and working with some heavy equipment,
if the choice is between hitting the little old lady, the school
bus, or the collision barrels, I will choose the barrels. Unless
they are damaged. Brakes fail and other problems occur which can
make you have to choose.

--
Robert Allison
Rimshot, Inc.
Georgetown, TX

Posted by DerbyDad03 on April 28, 2008, 1:03 pm
> DerbyDad03 wrote:
> > Just something I'm curious about...
>
> > I assume we've all seen the impact attenuators they put in front of
> > concrete highway dividers and toll booths - the barrels of sand or
> > large rubber bumbers. They're supposed to slow a vehicle down so they
> > don't hit the solid obstruction at full speed.
>
> > Why do they mark them with orange cones after they get damaged?
>
> > Are they trying to tell drivers not to hit them because they won't
> > they provide the anticipated protection?
>
> > As far as I know, drivers don't typically have the option of choosing
> > where to have an accident. If we were able to avoid the impact
> > attenuators when they are marked with cones, don't you think we'd
> > avoid them at all times?
>
> > What's the point of marking them with "caution cones" when no one
> > would actually consider hitting them even if they weren't damaged?
>
> They are not barrels of sand, but barrels of water. =A0They mark
> them for a couple of reasons. =A0One to indicate damage to the
> safety devices and to help prepare regular commuters for future
> repair crews which will come to replace them. =A0The notice to
> drivers is mostly a CYA for the governing authority.
>
> Number two is that at certain times, someone MAY HAVE to choose
> where to have an accident. =A0Being one who drags trailers around
> in the course of my work and working with some heavy equipment,
> if the choice is between hitting the little old lady, the school
> bus, or the collision barrels, I will choose the barrels. =A0Unless
> they are damaged. =A0Brakes fail and other problems occur which can
> make you have to choose.
>
> --
> Robert Allison
> Rimshot, Inc.
> Georgetown, TX- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

re: They are not barrels of sand, but barrels of water

I guess it depends on where you drive.

As per this site, none of the devices approved for permanent
installation use water, but one does use sand. Temp ones (e.g.
construction sites) are allowed to use water.

http://www.wsdot.wa.gov/EESC/Design/Policy/RoadsideSafety/Chapter720/sand.ht=
m

A doc found at an Ilinois site (http://www.wsdot.wa.gov/EESC/Design/
Policy/RoadsideSafety/Chapter720/sand.htm) also mentions sand filled
attenuators - granted it's 2006 doc, but the Washington site appears
to be current.

The ones I've seen damaged (and marked with cones) were messy piles of
plastic and sand.

Anyway, you mentioned that given the choice, you'd hit an unmarked
barrier rather than an old lady, so I'll accept that as a valid reason
for marking them. I certainly hope you never have to make that choice
- especially if it's marked with cones.

Posted by DerbyDad03 on April 28, 2008, 1:24 pm
> DerbyDad03 wrote:
> > Just something I'm curious about...
>
> > I assume we've all seen the impact attenuators they put in front of
> > concrete highway dividers and toll booths - the barrels of sand or
> > large rubber bumbers. They're supposed to slow a vehicle down so they
> > don't hit the solid obstruction at full speed.
>
> > Why do they mark them with orange cones after they get damaged?
>
> > Are they trying to tell drivers not to hit them because they won't
> > they provide the anticipated protection?
>
> > As far as I know, drivers don't typically have the option of choosing
> > where to have an accident. If we were able to avoid the impact
> > attenuators when they are marked with cones, don't you think we'd
> > avoid them at all times?
>
> > What's the point of marking them with "caution cones" when no one
> > would actually consider hitting them even if they weren't damaged?
>
> They are not barrels of sand, but barrels of water. =A0They mark
> them for a couple of reasons. =A0One to indicate damage to the
> safety devices and to help prepare regular commuters for future
> repair crews which will come to replace them. =A0The notice to
> drivers is mostly a CYA for the governing authority.
>
> Number two is that at certain times, someone MAY HAVE to choose
> where to have an accident. =A0Being one who drags trailers around
> in the course of my work and working with some heavy equipment,
> if the choice is between hitting the little old lady, the school
> bus, or the collision barrels, I will choose the barrels. =A0Unless
> they are damaged. =A0Brakes fail and other problems occur which can
> make you have to choose.
>
> --
> Robert Allison
> Rimshot, Inc.
> Georgetown, TX- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

re: They are not barrels of sand, but barrels of water.

As per this wa.gov site, none of the attenuators approved for
permanent installations use water but one does use sand. Temp ones may
use water.

http://www.wsdot.wa.gov/EESC/Design/Policy/RoadsideSafety/Chapter720/Chapter=
720B.htm

This doc from Illinois also mentions sand filled attenuators:

http://www.dot.state.il.us/desenv/specrev/80109.pdf

The ones I've seen damaged and marked were always piles of sand and
plastic. Maybe the water dried up. :-)

Anyway, your mention of making the choice the between an old lady and
the attenuators makes sense. I certainly hope you never have to make
that choice, and if you do, I hope the attenuator isn't marked by
cones. I'd feel real sorry for the old lady.



Posted by Kevin on April 28, 2008, 3:22 pm

> Just something I'm curious about...
>
> I assume we've all seen the impact attenuators they put in front of
> concrete highway dividers and toll booths - the barrels of sand or
> large rubber bumbers. They're supposed to slow a vehicle down so they
> don't hit the solid obstruction at full speed.
>
> Why do they mark them with orange cones after they get damaged?

> What's the point of marking them with "caution cones" when no one
> would actually consider hitting them even if they weren't damaged?

I work for our state's DOT, during the winter. I set out plenty of barrels,
when not keeping the xways free of snow & ice. Our barrels are empty, we
place a dual rubber base to keep it in place. By hand, you can move these
where ever you please. They are not meant to slow down a vehicle veering
out of control.

It's a liability thing on the State's part. Being the crash attenuator is
no longer functional, it must be marked. It relieves the state from
liability from someone claiming the state put potential hazard in their
right-of-way, intentionally.

If you look at any potential hazards in your State, chances are, they are
marked. That is, unless the marking has become defaced. A call to your
controlling authority, being local or DOT, will get the hazard
fixed.....ASAP. This is not to say exit sign posts are to be marked,
because they already use reflective letters or backing. Also, the post must
be able to bend or shear, or both.

Two years ago, in different district than ours, they had piled snow in
front of the exit signs, which are placed in the Gore (the triangle area
between the roadway and exit). They had rain, then freeze. What they ended
up with, was a giant ramp, which a vehicle had launched off of, when they
missed the exit ramp. The state settled out of court on this, since the
state had placed a hazard within their right-of-way.







Page 1 of 2       1 2 > last >>
Similar ThreadsPosted
Highway tree cutting July 18, 2007, 10:57 am
Air Impact Wrench August 9, 2005, 6:59 pm
How do I use an impact wrench September 21, 2006, 4:13 pm
How do I use an impact wrench September 21, 2006, 4:24 pm
How do I use an impact wrench September 21, 2006, 4:33 pm
Which portable impact wrench July 11, 2005, 12:25 am
Cost for impact windows? March 2, 2006, 11:59 am
someone, who has had an important impact on your life June 22, 2006, 4:00 pm
Impact Wrench Question October 1, 2006, 9:37 pm
12 volt impact wrench December 8, 2006, 10:43 pm

Contact Us | Privacy Policy

XML SitemapXML Sitemap