Minimization of Accident Severity Index in concrete barrier designs using an ensemble of radial basis function metamodel-based optimization

Özcanan, Sedat; Atahan, Ali Osman

doi:10.1007/s11081-020-09522-x

Cited by 7 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 44 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In the LS-DYNA model, the rail and post section are “Shell” modeled, and the “MAT24” is used as the material for both. Bolt connections between rail and post are defined as “Beam.” Materials and models validated from previous studies 10,31,32 were used in this research.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Bolt connections between rail and post are defined as ''Beam.'' Materials and models validated from previous studies 10,31,32 were used in this research. Figure 3 shows the meanings of the symbols which are forming the name of the guardrail system that is classified according to EN 1317 standards.…”

Section: The Details and Fe Models Of H1w2-a Guardrail Systemsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In studies on concrete barriers; Borkowski et al 9 simulated TB11 and TB32 tests separately for ground-fixed and non-fixed concrete barrier types using the LS-DYNA program, and it was stated that the unfixed barrier was safer than the fixed one in terms of ASI. Ozcanan and Atahan, 10 in their optimization to improve the ASI value of the NJ type concrete barrier, it was stated that the ASI value after the optimal design was improved by 14.1% compared to the original design, and in the case that the optimal barrier was not fixed to the ground, the ASI value obtained was 23.5% better than the original design value. Other than steel guardrails and concrete barriers mentioned above, there are studies related to roadside safety.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Criteria inadequacy of the vehicles used for the calculation of safety parameters in the EN1317-TB11 test

Özcanan

Ozcan

2022

Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers, Part D:

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Road restraint systems-RRS are passive safety designs installed on roadsides to ensure the safety of errant vehicle passengers as well as pedestrians. The adequacy of these systems is assessed through full-scale vehicle crash testing for which evaluation criteria are determined by standards such as EN1317. Recently the same RRS is crash tested two times with two different 900 kg passenger cars and test results varied significantly. After a failed crash test instead of modifying the barrier test vehicle was replaced and the same test was repeated. It was surprising to see that the failed RRS this time satisfied the EN1317 evaluation criteria. Despite the use of the same mass vehicle in the crash tests, the different results obtained were a source of motivation for investigating the inadequacy of EN1317. In this study, the adequacy of the 900 kg vehicle criteria used in the determination of the safety parameters in the EN1317-TB11 test was investigated by creating validated finite element-FE models. After the FE analysis it was concluded that test vehicle properties, such as vehicle mass and velocity provided in EN1317 are deemed to be insufficient and more explicit vehicle selection parameters, given in the study, are needed to provide safer and more uniform crash testing results.

show abstract

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: The Details and Fe Models Of H1w2-a Guardrail Systemsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Criteria inadequacy of the vehicles used for the calculation of safety parameters in the EN1317-TB11 test

Özcanan

Ozcan

2022

Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers, Part D:

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…types using the LS-DYNA program, and it was stated that the unfixed barrier was safer than the fixed one in terms of ASI. Ozcanan and Atahan [8], in their optimization to improve the ASI value of the NJ type concrete barrier, it was stated that the ASI value after the optimal design was improved by 14.1% compared to the original design, and in the case that the optimal barrier was not fixed to the ground, the ASI value obtained was 23.5% better than the original design value. Other than steel guardrails and concrete barriers mentioned above, there are studies related to roadside safety.…”

Section: Figure 1 -(A) Concrete Barriers (Rigid) (B) Steel Guardrails...mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Bolt connections between rail and post are defined as 'Beam'. Materials and models validated from previous studies [8], [26], [29] were used in this research.…”

Section: The Details and Fe Models Of H1w4-a Guardrail Systemmentioning

confidence: 99%

Finite Element Analysis and Investigation of Critical Impact Point of Steel Guardrails Affecting Safety and Structural Performance

Özcanan

2023

Turkish Journal of Civil Engineering

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

After the guardrails are designed, the structural adequacy and safety criteria are determined by the relevant standards and full-scale crash tests. One of the widely used standards is European Norm 1317 (EN1317). Guardrail systems generally consist of rails and posts. The guardrails are more rigid around the posts, which are mounted on the ground or embedded in soil at certain intervals. Therefore, it is important for driver/passenger and roadside safety to determine the most critical point in terms of structural and safety performance and design according to the most unfavorable situation. With this motivation, in this study, the effect of different impact points on the structural and safety performance of the H1W4 guardrail was investigated by finite element (FE) analysis. For this purpose, first of all, the finite element models of the H1W4-A system were calibrated and validated with real crash test data. Then, with the help of the validated models, analyses were completed for different impact points as 0.5, 1.0, 1.5 and 2.0 meters with a half-meter difference for the standard 2-meter post spacing. In the light of the measured safety parameters such as Acceleration Severity Index (ASI), Theoretical Head Impact Velocity (THIV) and structural performance criteria such as working width (W) and exit angle (α), the critical impact point for the guardrail was determined. Contrary to what is generally known, crashing vehicles into flexible points (0.5 and 1.0 m) rather than impacting rigid points (1.5 and 2.0 m) creates a more negative situation in crash tests.

show abstract

Finite element simulation and failure analysis of fixed bollard system according to the PAS 68:2013 standard

Apak

Ergun

Özen

et al. 2022

Engineering Failure Analysis

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Minimization of Accident Severity Index in concrete barrier designs using an ensemble of radial basis function metamodel-based optimization

Cited by 7 publications

References 44 publications

Criteria inadequacy of the vehicles used for the calculation of safety parameters in the EN1317-TB11 test

Criteria inadequacy of the vehicles used for the calculation of safety parameters in the EN1317-TB11 test

Finite Element Analysis and Investigation of Critical Impact Point of Steel Guardrails Affecting Safety and Structural Performance

Finite element simulation and failure analysis of fixed bollard system according to the PAS 68:2013 standard

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About