Welcome to Netrider ... Connecting Riders!

Interested in talking motorbikes with a terrific community of riders?
Signup (it's quick and free) to join the discussions and access the full suite of tools and information that Netrider has to offer.

[AUS] Wire Rope Barriers - A study of.

Discussion in 'Research, Studies, and Data' at netrider.net.au started by Chef, Jul 31, 2010.

  1. PDF link Wire rope barrier Study by The university of N.S.W. 2008?


    SUMMARY

    • Motorcycle fatalities resulting from roadside barriers crashes are low at around 5-6% which is around 14 per year nation wide of 238 fatalities.
    • Guardrail impacts are the most dangerous. Only 1 wire-rope rider impact found in WA – excessive speed striking another vehicle
      before striking barrier. Most likely died on impact with vehicle.
    • Concrete barrier impacts can also be dangerous but very low –4 fatalities
    • Guardrail impacts are the most dangerous and often struck.
    • Wire-rope impacts are rare. 70 –80% reduction in road fatalities wherever installed which is why they are being installed.
    • Solutions exist to reduce motorcycle fatalities – but credible science must be used so as not to effect all road users and gains to date.



     
     Top
    • Like Like x 1
  2. Very interesting Chef. Thanks for posting.
     
     Top
  3. My pleasure mate. :)

    I was surprised when I stumbled across it that it's not more widely publicised. It gives a bit of food for thought.

    It will be interesting to see what kind of discussion is generates.



    .
     
     Top
  4. Thanks Chef, The problem is a lack of any evidence either way. No investigation at an empirical level has been done its all based on statistical analysis of injuries that have occurred. That is too late I think, before you implement these roadside barriers investigation should be done on how they effect all members of the road community. I'm disappointed that the Uni NSW investigation ended up just being a rehash of the statistics that are already out there. :(
     
     Top
  5. well what do you want them to do? ask for volunteers to crash? In the end statistical analysis is good enough, and in any case, it will have to do.
     
     Top
  6. To me, this study is like saying, "I havn't burnt myself on the stove since having it, so it is safe to assume that I will not get burnt by putting my hands in the flames"
     
     Top
  7.  Top
  8. When initial investigation was being done into car accidents with seatbelts/airbags it was done with cadavers. From those investigations came the initial designs for Crash test dummies.

    Bone muscle substitutes could be found. Bike could be dummied up to run into barriers at different angles and speeds and then investigation of physical trauma done. The problem is no one cares enough to do these in depth investigations.
     
     Top
  9. The lack of slashing and clearing would occur with or without the WRB's cos they cant get the tractors in between the trees to slash the undergrowth.

    You also cant exactly do a U Turn on the freeway at most locations the WRB's have been put up because the trees they're protecting us from get in the way.
     
     Top
  10. I fail to see how the CFA's concerns have anything to do with ours, do we really want or need this discussion to be about them?

    The only parallels I see between the CFA's issue and our own is the arrogance of Vicroads.

    Over the years there have been numerous calls for a study to be done on WRBs, I thought by posting it here it would go some way to answering that request and possibly even generate some more discussion on the subject.

    Are wire rope barriers here to stay?

    Can they be made safer?

    Do all of them need to be made safer?
     
     Top
  11. Unfortunately

    Any crash barrier can always be safer. I have often thought why roads with a lot of room on the sides don't have a grassy slope so if a rider goes sliding it will be a bit softer and by the time they get to the barrier they would have slowed down a fair bit.

    Silly queation, if one barrier is going to be made safer and other barriers are neglected then the key word is that if someone crashes and is seriously injured or killed.
     
     Top
  12. As a CFA member I get to go to quite a few MVAs. I honestly shake my head at some of them and wonder how the hell they managed to do what they did. It just reinforces the belief that some people just shouldn't drive.

    WRBs, love them or hate them, have certainly done their job in helping to prevent vehicles from crossing into on-coming traffic. As alluded to in the report, the posts are the real hazard to us. If a rider is already on the deck & sliding, it is a case of trying to thread the needle between posts to prevent hitting one. THIS is where our efforts should be directed. They won't go away so lets make them safer.
     
     Top
  13.  Top
  14. You beat me to it, Tony....I was just having a read of that particular study (the first one) before I posted it up.....(y)
     
     Top
  15. The Eurorap study is a good one because it champions secondary rail systems to improve safety on all crash barriers. Systems such as Bikeguard, Moto. Tub and Plastrail which uses 70% recycled plastic from the French company Solidar. Sorry couldn't find any info on this product.

    The FEMA European report covers some of the options.

    There are options available to make all roadside barriers more effective and safer for all road users.
     
     Top
  16. At the moment there are trials of material taking place in Victoria. They've all been placed in high motorcycle usage places - the problem is that no one has actually hit them yet (as far as is known).


    Trials in progress include:
    • 9 sites treated with barrier protection (including on guard rail and wire rope barrier)
    • 4 sites treated with motorcycle friendly products (including frangible signs and posts)
    • additional sites treated with 'Rubrail' - metal sheeting under guard rail

    Strategic Plan Progress Report
     
     Top
  17. Tony, any follow up from that report?

    Thanks for the thread Cheffie, this thread came up in a search on WRB's and has provided key resource material for the DNRSS review I'm working on. Cheers.
     
     Top
  18. Good work Robbie. The incidence figures in the report will turn into a furphy fairly rapidly as they come from a time when not much WRB was being used. But as all roads a re being treated with it now the incidences of riders coming into contact will escalate.

    Two more pieces of the puzzle which i do not have any details or references for. 1 study has shown a decrease in speeds of M/Cs on road with WRB treatment, which makes sense. Also I was told anecdotally of a trial being conducted in the Adelaide Hills of a M/C safe shroud being used on a WRB. Edgelette may be able to point you to more info regarding that one.
     
     Top
  19. Interesting idea Chef, a bit of 6mm poly-belt over the wire might reduce the risk and maybe to significantly less than that of regular guard rail? Worth investigating at any rate.
     
     Top
  20. I really can't provide any more detail at the moment so I apologise, Tony might be able to dig some up for us, or perhaps the South Oz MRA. I saw some stuff on the net a couple of years ago from the EU trials of shrouding. Basically from what I saw it's a curtain that drops down in front of the WRB so riders can slide along it instead of penetrating it with limbs. If it's adopted and used, WRBs with M/C treatment will turn out to be safer than Armco ever was.

    The problem is, Armco is a lot safer with a bottom rub rail put in place, but we hardly ever see it. So I expect we'll have the same problem with WRB. The studies may well prove they're safer with a shroud, but it's getting them to install them that will be the problem. Oh, that and getting the bastards to release studies that fall in our favor but cost them money, they like to hold onto those :evil:
     
     Top