<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="https://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>Transport Research International Documentation (TRID)</title>
    <link>https://trid.trb.org/</link>
    <atom:link href="https://trid.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>Northern and Southern European Traffic Flow Land Segment Analysis as Part of the Redirection Justification</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/1493677</link>
      <description><![CDATA[Natural geotraffic flows act as one of the most important factors directly affecting redirections of the world transportation routes. In terms of door-to-door multimodal transport chain, several routes from Far East toward European destinations exist, with Northern European route acting as prevailing one. The proposed paper elaborates possibilities of redirection of the traffic flow by directing cargoes to an alternative route through the Adriatic Sea. The aim is to justify realisation of mentioned possibility in terms of land transportation segment analysis, i.e. by analysing cargo transportation from ports to final destinations in Central Europe, placed in natural gravitational hinterland of ports of Northern Adriatic Port Association (NAPA). Geo-traffic and logistics' analyses of NAPA ports are presented in the paper. Container traffic and its trend as compared with Northern European ports are analysed. The development plans of inland connections are presented in function of justification of the traffic flow redirection. A model for the selection and evaluation of the optimal container transport route by using the multiple criteria analysis (MCA) has been introduced and developed. The model was applied for the selection of the representative service connecting Far East (origin) and the central Europe (destination) by detailed analysis of the land transportation segment. The PROMETHEE method was used for the model testing and evaluation. Summarised results are presented and discussed tending to confirmation of the traffic flow redirection justification.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 25 Jan 2018 09:24:30 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/1493677</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Research on Modified Redirective Crash Cushions at Triangular End Shunts of an Expressway</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/1372038</link>
      <description><![CDATA[Existing anti-crash facilities, such as anti-collision sand barrels before crash barriers triangle end, did not meet the safety protection requirements and national standards. So, considerable modification of the existing facilities was needed to improve protection effect. According to the safety performance evaluation of highway guardrail standards, impact simulations of car with 100km/h were carried out by finite element analysis. Simulations of frontal, oblique or side impact between car and modified crash cushion were analyzed. With the help of modified crash cushion, vehicles were slowly stopped and maintained in normal sate. Crash cushion energy absorption components completely deformed, and in the greatest protection function. Then, frontal impact test with real vehicle was carried out, the result indicated that the simulations could reflect the characteristics of improved crash cushion, and vehicle safety could be improved by the modified crash cushion.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 02 Nov 2015 09:18:31 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/1372038</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Improving Safety</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/1320842</link>
      <description><![CDATA[Highway safety for road users is being improved because new guardrail technologies and barrier developments are beginning to come to market. These new barrier and guardrail developments offer better visibility to alert drivers with better restraint. Cable barriers are widely used because they are easy to install and offer good redirection for cars and trucks. In the event of an impact, these new steel and cable barriers allow the guardrail to rise up so that the vehicle cannot go over it. The article presents many new applications from vendors around the world.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 28 Aug 2014 09:12:36 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/1320842</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Effect of joint mechanism on vehicle redirectional capability of water-filled road safety barrier systems</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/1317226</link>
      <description><![CDATA[Portable water-filled barriers (PWFBs) are roadside appurtenances that prevent vehicles from penetrating into temporary construction zones on roadways. PWFBs are required to satisfy the strict regulations for vehicle re-direction in tests. However, many of the current PWFBs fail to re-direct the vehicle at high speeds due to the inability of the joints to provide appropriate stiffness. The joint mechanism hence plays a crucial role in the performance of a PWFB system at high speed impacts. This paper investigates the desired features of the joint mechanism in a PWFB system that can re-direct vehicles at high speeds, while limiting the lateral displacement to acceptable limits. A rectangular “wall” representative of a 30 m long barrier system was modeled and a novel method of joining adjacent road barriers was introduced through appropriate pin-joint connections. The impact response of the barrier “wall” and the vehicle was obtained and the results show that a rotational stiffness of 3000 kNm/rad at the joints seems to provide the desired features of the PWFB system to re-direct impacting vehicles and restrict the lateral deflection. These research findings will be useful to safety engineers and road barrier designers in developing a new generation of PWFBs for increased road safety.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 27 Aug 2014 10:54:47 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/1317226</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Assessing the cost and CO₂e impacts of rerouteing UK import containers</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/1305715</link>
      <description><![CDATA[Among the most important trade-related issues currently confronting the UK are the environmental implications of very large volumes of containerised freight being handled at a small number of ports while there appears to be significant potential for using other ports and water-rail intermodal connections. Six UK ports are selected for the analysis: Hull/Immingham, Liverpool, Felixstowe, Southampton, Dover and Bristol. Through an origin-destination analysis, the cost and CO₂e impacts of UK port trade patterns are compared using the actual situation against three proposed Scenarios: (1) the re-direction of containers by a combined expansion of Hull and Immingham; Liverpool; and Bristol, (2) moving containers by rail facilitated via expanded capacity at Southampton, and (3) moving containers by rail through expanded capacity at Felixstowe. The research found that transporting containers from Felixstowe and Southampton to the northern regions by rail has the lowest CO₂e impact, and is the most feasible option, although constraints exist in terms of infrastructure provision, water depth and rail network capacity.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Tue, 29 Apr 2014 10:50:50 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/1305715</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Cable Median Barrier Failure Analysis and Prevention</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/1251176</link>
      <description><![CDATA[Cross-median crashes have been identified as one of the highest injury or fatality risk crash types. Although cross-median crashes account for only 2% to 5% of all median crash events, they are disproportionately represented in the number and frequency of fatalities on interstate roadways. Many states have utilized cable median barriers to reduce the risk of cross-median crashes, frequently with great success. However, cable median barriers are also fixed obstacles to errant vehicles. Cable median barriers can place occupants at increased risk of severe injury or fatality if the barrier fails to adequately contain and redirect errant vehicles, resulting in a vehicular penetration through the barrier or rollover. As total cable median barrier mileage continues to climb, there is an opportunity to prevent many penetration, rollover, and serious injury or fatality crashes by improving barrier design, installation guidelines, and crash-testing guidelines to more adequately address crash concerns with these barrier types. More than 6,000 cable median barrier crashes from 12 different states were analyzed to determine causes of barrier containment failures, and new crash test conditions which were reflective of these impact conditions were identified. Further crash testing and barrier redesign should reduce the frequency of barrier penetrations and rollovers.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 29 May 2013 10:55:43 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/1251176</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Importance of an Appropriate Transition in a Longitudinal Barrier Design</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/1246585</link>
      <description><![CDATA[A transition is defined as a section of barrier used to produce the gradual stiffening of a flexible or semi-rigid barrier as it connects to a more rigid barrier or fixed object. These transitions should provide an effective transition between longitudinal barriers with different lateral stiffness and redirect impacting vehicles without any contact with the rigid barrier. Stiffer transitions can be accomplished through the use of additional posts with reduced post spacing, larger posts, doubled (nested) rail elements, rubrails, and other special features such as use of a stiffer semi-rigid barrier such as a thrie-beam barrier. Transitions typically are generic designs. NCHRP 350: "Recommended Procedures for the Safety Performance Evaluation of Highway Features," AASHTO’s "Manual for Assessing Safety Hardware," and European Normative (EN) 1317-4 have outlined testing requirements for transitions.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 27 Mar 2013 12:19:57 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/1246585</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Median Barrier Placement on Six-lane, 46-foot Median Divided Freeways</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/1098768</link>
      <description><![CDATA[This report summarizes the research efforts of using finite element modeling and simulations to evaluate the performance of W-beam guardrails and cable median barriers on six-lane, 46-foot median divided freeways. A literature review is included on performance evaluation of W-beam guardrails and cable barriers as well as applications of finite element modeling and simulations in roadside safety research. The three types of barriers evaluated in this project are the single-face W-beam, double-face W-beam (two designs), and generic low-tension cable barrier. All three types of barriers were evaluated at three impact speeds and three impact angles. Full-scale crash simulations were first performed on a single-face W-beam guardrail placed on the border of a 2.5:1 slope and the shoulder. Two designs of a double-face W-beam guardrail, which replaced the single-face W-beam at the same location, were then evaluated using simulations and compared to the single-face one. Finally, simulations were performed on vehicles impacting the cable median barrier placed on a 4:1 slope. The simulation results demonstrated the effects of sloped medians on vehicle redirection after contacting the cable median barriers or W-beam guardrails. A common issue for a sloped median is the increased potential of vehicle rollovers, particularly for large-size vehicles. The results will be used to update and validate the standard drawings and strategies for placement of median guardrails and cable barriers. The use of finite element simulations is shown to be both effective and efficient, because they are nondestructive, repeatable, modifiable, and inexpensive. Furthermore, finite element simulations can be used to study crash scenarios that are impossible and/or extremely expensive to conduct physical crash testing. Finite element modeling and simulations are recommended for future investigations of other research issues.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 06 Apr 2011 16:31:17 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/1098768</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Dynamic Evaluation of a Pinned Anchoring System for New York State’s Temporary Concrete Barriers – Phase II</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/923580</link>
      <description><![CDATA[Temporary concrete barrier (TCB) systems are utilized in many situations, including placement adjacent to vertical drop-offs. Free-standing TCB systems are known to have relatively large deflections when impacted, which may be undesirable when dealing with limited space behind the barrier, such as on a bridge deck or with limited lane width in front of the barrier system. In order to allow TCB systems to be used in space-restricted locations, a variety of TCB stiffening options have been tested, including beam stiffening and pinning the barriers to the pavement. These pavement-pinning procedures have been considered time-consuming and may pose undue risk to work-zone personnel who are anchoring the barrier on the traffic-side face. Thus, a means of reducing TCB deflections while reducing risk to workers was deemed necessary. The primary research objectives were to evaluate the potential for reducing barrier deflections through the use of pinning every barrier section on the back-side toe of the New York State’s New Jersey-shape TCBs and evaluate the barrier system according to the Test Level 3 (TL-3) criteria set forth in the AASHTO Manual for Assessing Safety Hardware (MASH). The research study included one full-scale vehicle crash test with a Dodge Quad Cab pickup truck. Four 15½-in. (394-mm) long, vertical steel pins were placed through holes on the back-side toe of each barrier section and inserted into drilled holes within the rigid concrete surface. Following the successful redirection of the pickup truck, the safety performance of the pinned anchoring system was determined to be acceptable according to the TL-3 evaluation criteria specified in MASH using the 2270P vehicle.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 19 Jul 2010 16:31:08 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/923580</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Dynamic Evaluation of a Pinned Anchoring System for New York State’s Temporary Concrete Barriers</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/914422</link>
      <description><![CDATA[Temporary concrete barrier (TCB) systems are utilized in many circumstances, including for placement adjacent to vertical dropoffs. Free-standing TCB systems are known to have relatively large deflections when impacted, which may be undesirable when dealing with limited space behind the barrier (as seen on a bridge deck) or limited lane width in front of the barrier system. In order to allow TCB systems to be used in space-restricted locations, a variety of TCB stiffening options have been tested, including beam stiffening and pinning the barriers to the pavement. These pavement-pinning procedures have been considered time-consuming and may pose undue risk to work-zone personnel who are anchoring the barrier on the traffic-side face. Thus, a means of reducing TCB deflections while reducing risk to workers was deemed necessary. The primary research objective was to evaluate the potential for pinning alternate barrier sections on the back-side toe of the New York State’s New Jersey-shape TCBs and evaluate the barrier system according to the Test Level 3 (TL-3) criteria set forth in the Manual for Assessing Safety Hardware (MASH). The research study included one 2270P full-scale vehicle crash test with a Dodge Quad Cab pickup truck. Four 15½-in. (394-mm) long, vertical steel pins were placed through holes on the back-side toe of alternating barrier sections and inserted into drilled holes within the rigid concrete surface. Following the successful redirection of the pickup truck, the safety performance of the pinned anchoring system was determined to be acceptable according to the TL-3 evaluation criteria specified in MASH using the 2270P vehicle. However, it should be noted that significant barrier deflections were observed during the crash test and may be greater than those desired for work areas with restricted space.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Fri, 19 Mar 2010 07:28:03 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/914422</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Roadside Hazard and Barrier Crashworthiness Issues Confronting Vehicle and Barrier Manufacturers and Government Regulators</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/813014</link>
      <description><![CDATA[Run-off-road crashes into roadside hazards that include impacting rigid objects and rollover constitute approximately 40% of road fatalities and crossover two car frontal collisions account for around 7% of fatalities in Australia. Considerable onus to protect vehicle occupants during such crashes sits with vehicle manufacturers. It is clear from research to date, however, that side impacts into narrow objects beyond impact speeds of 40 km/hr, head-on and large engagement offset crashes at closing speeds of 120 km/hr, and rollover crashes are presently at the limits of survivability. One way of protecting occupants in such crashes is to use a roadside or median barrier to safely redirect the vehicle. Road crash barriers can in themselves be hazardous unless designed properly. Errant vehicle redirection should occur so that air bag and seat belt pretensioning systems do not fire and rollover does not occur. Research into roadside barrier crash tests carried out by the Department of Civil Engineering at Monash University over the past decade, has revealed some key crashworthiness characteristics that both vehicle and barrier manufacturers alike need to consider. This paper presents results of crash tests that provide some insight into vehicle-barrier crash pulses, occupant and vehicle kinematics and desirable occupant protection systems related to existing barrier profiles and properties and what are the most suitable vehicle and barrier crashworthiness features essential for safe vehicle redirection. The paper also argues, using some real-world examples, in favor of bringing together road designers and car manufacturers with associated regulatory bodies to emphasize a holistic perspective to enhance occupant protection in road crashes.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Tue, 11 Sep 2007 14:04:29 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/813014</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Development of Tie-Down and Transition Systems for Temporary Concrete Barrier on Asphalt Road Surfaces</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/811453</link>
      <description><![CDATA[The objective of this research was to design a tie-down system for temporary concrete barriers for use on asphalt road surfaces, and then apply that tie-down system to the design of an approach transition from free-standing to rigid barriers.  The tie-down and transition systems were to be evaluated according to the Test Level 3 (TL-3) safety performance criteria set forth in National Cooperative Highway Research Program (NCHRP) Report No. 350.  For the asphalt tie-down system, three steel pins wee installed in holes on the front face of the barrier.  The new tie-down design was crash tested according to NCHRP Report No. 350 test designation 3-11.  The test was judged acceptable, barrier deflections were reduced, and all of the barriers in the system were safely restrained.  The approach transition to rigid barrier was developed through strategic application of the previously designed asphalt tie-down.  Computer simulation with LS-DYNA was used to locate the critical impact point for the full-scale crash test.  The system was tested according to NCHRP Report No. 350 test designation 3-21.  The results showed that the vehicle was safely redirected, and the test was judged acceptable.  Recommendations regarding the application of both the tie-down and transition designs were given.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 18 Jul 2007 15:36:28 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/811453</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Serb Guardrail - South Ashland Interchange, California State Line Section Pacific Highway (Interstate 5), Jackson County, Oregon</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/786340</link>
      <description><![CDATA[The Self Restoring Barrier (SERB) is a proprietary guardrail unit comprised of a single tubular thrie beam held outward from the supporting wooden posts by pivoting metal arms, its height above the ground secured by short cables attached to the top of the wooden posts.  Two SERB guardrail systems were installed on the Pacific Highway (Interstate 5) in southern Oregon as part of an Experimental Features Project for the Oregon Department of Transportation (ODOT).  The SERB guardrails were placed along the same alignment as the previous standard guardrail.  The SERB guardrail is designed to redirect vehicles (including larger vehicles) when struck, yet requires little or no maintenance after being struck by smaller vehicles.  During the three years of in-service performance, the SERB guardrails experienced some damage to the rail, and were not repaired.  A problem with the lag screw that connects the support cable to the guardrail post was found:  the lag screw had been slipping from the weight of the thrie beam, allowing the guardrails to sag.  However, the guardrails were still functional in 90% of the length of installation.  The local maintenance district opted to remove the SERB in July of 1993.  Reasons cited for removal included high costs, manpower, and traffic control in a dangerous work zone.  This final report covers the three evaluation and removals of the SERB guardrails.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 17 Jul 2006 15:46:39 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/786340</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>CONCRETE SAFETY SHAPE WITH METAL RAIL ON TOP TO REDIRECT 80,000 LB TRUCKS</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/266849</link>
      <description><![CDATA[Since the 32 in. (81 cm) high concrete safety shape is a popular median and bridge barrier, it was desirable to see if it could be modified to make it an effective traffic rail for trucks.  An 18 in. (46 cm) high metal traffic rail was mounted on top of the 32 in. (81 cm) high concrete safety shape to make a bridge rail 50 in.  (127 cm) high to restrain and redirect 80,000 lb (36,287 kg) van-type trucks. The bridge rail was impacted by such a truck at 48.4 mph (77.9 km/h) at an angle of 14.5 degrees.  The bridge rail did restrain the truck on the simulation bridge.  The truck did roll on its side.  This was attributed to the 9.5 in. (24 cm) setback of the metal rail from the sloping face of the concrete safety shape, which produced a roll angle of 11.3 degrees before the vehicle contacted the metal rail. The final position of the truck was parallel to and in front of the rail.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Fri, 27 Aug 2004 21:13:17 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/266849</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>BRIDGE RAIL TO RESTRAIN AND REDIRECT 80,000 LB TANK TRUCKS</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/266848</link>
      <description><![CDATA[A standard Texas type T5 traffic rail was modified to increase its height and strength to contain and redirect an 80,000 lb (36,300 kt) tank-type tractor-trailer at 50 mph (80.5 km/h), 15 degree impacts.  The concrete parapet was increased to 48 in. (122 cm) high, and a concrete beam was mounted on concrete posts on top of the parapet to achieve a total rail height of 90 in.  (229 cm).  One crash test was conducted on the bridge rail.  The truck was contained and smoothly redirected.  This test has shown that a bridge rail can redirect heavy tank-type trucks at speeds up to 50 mph (80.5 km/h) and 15 degree impacts.  The cost of this rail is estimated at about $125 per foot.  Typical passenger car bridge rails in Texas now cost about $35 per foot.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Fri, 27 Aug 2004 21:13:16 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/266848</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>