Skip to main content

Stronger crash barriers may be needed for heavier trucks

The European Road Federation (ERF) has voiced its concern that roadside barriers in Europe may have to be upgraded According to the ERF, the recent decision of the European Commission to allow cross-border movement of longer and heavier trucks, it is keen to raise awareness of the important implications such a move may have for road barriers. ‘Road safety barriers are designed and tested according to the maximum weight of vehicles circulating on Europe’s roads. The current European Norm (EN 1317) allows for
January 4, 2013 Read time: 4 mins
Italy’s A4 autostrade is a major link in the country and has been widened and modernised but larger trucks could pose future dangers for crossover crashes, with potential results similar to those fatal crashes that have happened in the past

The 1202 European Road Federation (ERF) has voiced its concern that roadside barriers in Europe may have to be upgraded

According to the ERF, the recent decision of the 2465 European Commission to allow cross-border movement of longer and heavier trucks, it is keen to raise awareness of the important implications such a move may have for road barriers.

‘Road safety barriers are designed and tested according to the maximum weight of vehicles circulating on Europe’s roads. The current European Norm (EN 1317) allows for the testing of barriers considering the impact of vehicles up to a maximum of 38tonnes. We are concerned that, should heavier vehicles be allowed to circulate more widely on Europe’s roads, this may have serious implications on the ability of road barriers to protect drivers from their own human mistakes’ explains Christophe Nicodème, Director General of the ERF.

'We do not have an ideological opposition to heavier vehicles', explained Konstandinos Diamandouros, Head of Office at ERF and responsible for the area of road restraint systems. ‘We simply believe that the introduction of heavier vehicles on selected routes should be accompanied by the necessary adaptations to the road infrastructure and this of course includes safety barriers.’

Road restraint systems are designed and tested up to withstand the impact of a maximum 38tonne truck. Given that the current directive in force allows a maximum weight of 44tonnes, even the current barrier requirements do not match the maximum weight of trucks on Europe’s roads.

In the ERF’s opinion, the introduction of heavier vehicles on Europe’s motorways may entail serious safety implication for the ability of passive safety devices to protect drivers. An H4b road restraint system designed for a vehicle weighing 38tonnes may be unable to withstand the impact of 60tonne truck crashing against it. Such accidents are infrequent but they can be lethal, like the accident which occurred in 2008 on the Italian A4 autostrade, which killed seven people.

Clearly, there is need for a modification of European Norm 1317 for Vehicle Restraint Systems to introduce a new containment level.

Meanwhile the UK’s 5125 Institute of Advanced Motorists (IAM) has called for roadside barriers to feature post protection so as to reduce the risk of injuries to motorcyclists.

The IAM have repeated calls for improvements to guardrail used along most British roads. It points out that these are designed to protect motorists inside trucks, cars or buses. For motorcyclists the barriers themselves pose a safety hazard, as a fallen rider can impact with the support posts causing serious injury or death. Technology does exist to deal with the issue such as fitting additional barrier sections or impact cushions, but these are not widely used across Europe and are only required as yet in Spain.

New research from Sweden shows that modern crash barriers actually provide no safety benefits to motorcyclists. Modern crash barriers are designed to save the lives of drivers, but amongst motorcyclists, hitting a crash barrier is a factor in 8-16% of fatal crashes, according to an IAM-sponsored study. Riders are fifteen times more likely to die after hitting a barrier than car occupants. Britain’s current barriers protect car occupants by redirecting the car away from the barrier and slowing it down over a short distance. The car’s body, seat belts and air bags also help to minimise injury. For motorcyclists, there is no such protection, leaving the rider’s body to take the full impact, resulting in serious injury or death.

Around 67% of all collisions between motorcyclists and crash barriers which result in death or serious injury include the rider either falling over or sliding under the crash barrier. Adding a shield to the barrier to prevent the rider from sliding underneath and colliding with support posts would reduce fatalities by up to a third. Crash barrier support posts can worsen the injuries of motorcyclists involved in an accident by five times. IAM director of policy and research Neil Greig said, “Our crash barriers are designed with cars in mind, but they can cause more harm than good for motorcyclists. Modifications are happening across Europe as governments recognise exactly how dangerous they are. Last year deaths and injuries of motorcyclists increased in the UK, so we must do more to protect them. Adding extra protection the barrier so that the posts aren’t exposed is a simple and cost-effective way to save lives.”

For more information on companies in this article

Related Content

  • Swedish motorcycle test
    November 10, 2015
    In Sweden crash testing has been carried out using motorcycles for the first time. Four crash tests were carried out at the VTI crash laboratory in Linköping, Sweden, for the client, the insurance company Folksam. As a result, Swedish motorcyclists can expect safer barriers according to VTI, the Swedish National Road and Transport Research Insitute. The VTI have participated in two different projects with focus on better safety for motorcyclists. The first project was run in cooperation with the Swedish Mo
  • Industry AMS opts for safety in any direction
    January 25, 2017
    Italian company AMS explains how its crashworthy end terminals act like a crash cushion Industry AMS (Automation Manufacturing Services) has developed a crashworthy end terminal tested according to part 7 of the EN 1317 that is classified as a double-sided and bi-directional end terminal. Starting from the European version of the terminal, and based on the same architecture, AMS has designed the SMA (Safety Modular Absorber) as a reinforced end-terminal in order to be complaint with both the MASH and
  • A future UK government should focus more on potholes and road safety
    April 10, 2015
    With a national UK election looming next month, a future government must make road safety a top priority, said the Institute of Advanced Motorists (IAM). Half of motorists in a recent survey of 2,156 people, and conducted IAM in March, said the current administration has not given the issue as much attention as is needed. The number one issue that the government should be focussing on, according to 70% of respondents, is the reduction of the number of potholes. The backlog of repairs now tops more
  • Implementing road safety initiatives
    July 13, 2012
    Blair Turner examines infrastructure options for achieving Safe System outcomes and their implementation in Australia Like a number of other developed countries around the world, Australia has recently adopted a 'Safe System' approach to addressing road safety. This approach, which stems from Sweden's Vision Zero and Sustainable Safety in the Netherlands, recognises that humans as road users are fallible and will make mistakes. There are also limits to the kinetic energy exchange that humans can tolerate (