Wolny Radoslaw, Bruski Dawid, Budzyński Marcin, Pachocki Lukasz, Wilde Krzysztof
Department of Mechanics of Materials and Structures, Faculty of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Gdansk University of Technology, 80-233 Gdansk, Poland.
Department of Highway and Transportation Engineering, Faculty of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Gdansk University of Technology, 80-233 Gdansk, Poland.
Materials (Basel). 2022 Jul 15;15(14):4926. doi: 10.3390/ma15144926.
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.
道路设备，例如道路安全屏障和照明柱，须根据EN1317标准进行认证，方可在欧洲道路上使用。在工程实践中，由于地形条件，存在其他道路设备安装在道路安全屏障工作宽度范围内的情况。在认证过程中未考虑此类情况。因此，本研究的目的是分析安装在屏障工作宽度范围内的照明柱对TB51碰撞试验结果的影响。对此事件进行了全尺寸碰撞试验和数值模拟。在全尺寸碰撞试验以及模拟中，照明柱阻止了屏障立柱与护栏正确分离，导致屏障无法约束和重新引导13吨重的公交车。将模拟结果与实验进行了定量比较，其中ASI曲线的相关系数为84%。实验和模拟中的THIV曲线存在显著差异，本文对此进行了解释。接下来，对比了有照明柱和没有照明柱的模拟情况。没有照明柱的模拟中，ASI和THIV分别为0.33和16.1公里/小时。有照明柱的模拟中，ASI和THIV分别为0.44和17.7公里/小时。没有照明柱的模拟中车辆的最大侧倾角为2.01°，有照明柱时为5.96°。然而，主要的区别在于，在屏障工作宽度范围内没有照明柱的系统能够正确约束和重新引导车辆。本文描述了这种行为背后的具体力学原理。
