1、 John F. Cox, President Director, Wyoming Department of Transportation Bud Wright, Executive Director 444 North Capitol Street NW, Suite 249, Washington, DC 20001(202) 624-5800 Fax: (202) 624-5806 www.transportation.org ERRATA July 2015 Dear Customer: Recently, we were made aware of some technical r
2、evisions that need to be applied to the Roadside Design Guide, 4th Edition. Please replace the existing text with the corrected text to ensure that your edition is both accurate and current. Text in bold indicates revisions made since the previous errata was released in February 2012. AASHTO staff s
3、incerely apologizes for any inconvenience. 2015 by the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials.All rights reserved. Duplication is a violation of applicable law.Errata to Roadside Design Guide, 4thEdition RSDG-4-E5 1 July 2015 Page Existing Text Corrected Text 3-3 In Table
4、 3-1, U.S. Customary units, the backslopes for the Design Speed 40 mph were listed as Design ADT Backslope 1V:3H 1V:5H to 1V:4H 1V:6H or Flatter Under 750 710 710 710 7501500 1214 1214 1214 15006000 1416 1416 1416 Over 6000 1618 1618 1618 The attached replacement page shows the correct backslope val
5、ues as follows: Design ADT Backslope 1V:3H 1V:5H to 1V:4H 1V:6H or Flatter Under 750 710 710 710 7501500 1012 1012 1012 15006000 1214 1214 1214 Over 6000 1416 1416 1416 3-21 Example 3-D does not have “Discussion” text to follow after the figure. Add the following text: “DiscussionSince the critical
6、foreslope is within the suggested clear-zone distance of 9 to 10.5 m 30 to 34 ft, it should be flattened if practical or considered for shielding. However, if this is an isolated obstacle and the roadway has no significant crash history, it may be appropriate to do little more than delineate the dro
7、p-off in lieu of foreslope flattening or shielding.” 3-26 Example 3-K, Curve 2The cross sections in the figure need to be banked the opposite direction in order to correspond to the plan view as shown on page 3-27. Also, the dimension “11 to 15 ft” should be changed to “10 to 15 ft.” Substitute Exam
8、ple 3-K with the attached revised figure. 3-28 Example 3-L, Curves 2 and 3The cross sections in the figure need to be banked the opposite direction in order to correspond to the plan view as shown on page 3-29. Also, the dimension “10.5 to 15 ft” for Curve 2 should be changed to “10 to 15 ft.” Subst
9、itute Example 3-L with the attached revised figures. 3-29 Example 3-L, Curve 4The dimension “14 to 16.8 ft” for Curve 4 should be changed to “14 to 16 ft.” Substitute Example 3-L with the attached revised figure. 5-12 For NU-GUARD by Nucor Marion in Table 5-3, the Test Level is listed as “3” and the
10、 FHWA Acceptance Letter is listed as “B-162.” Change the Test Level for NU-GUARD to “3 and 4” and the FHWA Acceptance Letter to “B-162 and B-162B.” 5-42 The second sentence of the last paragraph reads “The design incorporates 2.74-m 9-ft long posts . . .” Change the text to read “The design incorpor
11、ates 2.74-m 9-ft long steel posts . . .” 5-43 In Figure 35(a), the U.S. customary drawing is missing a dimension line on the far left side; the metric drawing has an extra line connecting a dimension line to the top of the pavement.Substitute Figure 5-35(a) with the attached revised figure. 2015 by
12、the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials.All rights reserved. Duplication is a violation of applicable law.Errata to Roadside Design Guide, 4thEdition RSDG-4-E5 2 July 2015 Page Existing Text Corrected Text 5-49 Figure 5-39 refers to Figure 5-22. The correct cross refer
13、ence is to Figure 5-42. 5-58 Figure 5-47 has partial text missing. Substitute Figure 5-47 with the attached revised figure. 6-2 Figure 6-1 shows incorrect metric and U.S. measurements for median widths. Substitute Figure 6-1 with the attached revised figure. 6-7 Figure 6-4 shows incorrect image of B
14、rifen Wire Rope Safety Fence. Substitute Figure 6-4 with the attached revised figure. 8-9 Table 8-2 requires several changes under Height Terminals, Flared Terminals, and Tangent Terminals. Substitute Table 8-2 with the attached revised table. 8-19 The first sentence of Section 8.3.7 reads “This sec
15、tion describes end terminals and their design criteria for two box-beam guardrail systems.” Change this sentence to read “This section describes the terminals for the box-beam guardrail system discussed in Chapter 5.” 8-23 The first sentence of Section 8.4.2 includes “. . . in accordance with TL-2 o
16、r TL-3 conditions . . .” Change this phrase to read “. . . in accordance with TL-1, TL-2, or TL-3 conditions . . .” 8-29 The final sentence of Section 8.4.2.2.2 states “Figure 8-28 shows this eight-bay system.” Change this sentence to read “Figure 8-28 shows a four-bay system.” 8-31 The third senten
17、ce of Section 8.4.2.3 begins “Although some attenuators can . . .” Change this sentence to read “Although some crash cushions can . . .” 8-31 In Table 8-7, text is missing from the FHWA Acceptance Level column (row 3). Add “CC89A” after CC89. 8-32 The first sentence of Section 8.4.2.3.3 begins “The
18、HEARTTMis a proprietary, energy-absorbing, unidirectional crash cushion . . .” Change this sentence to read “The HEARTTMis a proprietary, energy-absorbing, bidirectional crash cushion . . .”8-33 In Section 8.4.2.3.3, the last sentence reads: “The opposite direction crash test was not performed; ther
19、efore, until further testing is done, the HEART should be used only in locations with one-way traffic.” Delete this sentence. 8-48 & 8-49 In Table 8-12, Sand Filled Barrels is placed in the wrong section. Substitute Table 8-12 with the attached revised table. 10-10 The illustrations for Figures 10-4
20、 and 10-5 need to be transposed. Also, the width of the Narrow Buffer Strip should be “1.2 m 4-0. Substitute the attached page with the revised illustrations in the correct order. 11-7 Figure 11-5 shows incorrect measurement of taper for LS. Substitute Figure 11-5 with the attached revised figure. 2
21、015 by the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials.All rights reserved. Duplication is a violation of applicable law.Errata to Roadside Design Guide, 4thEdition RSDG-4-E5 3 July 2015 Page Existing Text Corrected Text G-1 Definition of Clear Zone reads: “The total roadside
22、border area, starting at the edge of the traveled way, available for safe use by errant vehicles. This area may consist of a shoulder, a recoverable slope, a non-recoverable slope, and/or a clear run-out area. The desired width is dependent upon the traffic volumes and speeds and on the roadside geo
23、metry.” The definition should read: “The unobstructed, traversable area provided beyond the edge of the through traveled way for the recovery of errant vehicles. The clear zone includes shoulders, bike lanes, and auxiliary lanes, except those auxiliary lanes that function like through lanes.” 2015 b
24、y the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials.All rights reserved. Duplication is a violation of applicable law.Roadside Topography and Drainage Features 3-3c) For roadways with low volumes, it may not be practical to apply even the minimum values found in Table 3-1. Refer
25、 to Chapter 12 for additional considerations for low-volume roadways and Chapter 10 for additional guidance for urban applications.d) When design speeds are greater than the values provided, the designer may provide clear-zone distances greater than those shown in Table 3-1.U.S. Customary Units Desi
26、gn Speed(mph)DesignADTForeslopes Backslopes1V:6Hor flatter1V:5H to 1V:4H1V:3H 1V:3H1V:5H to 1V:4H1V:6Hor flatter40UNDER 750c750150015006000OVER 6000710101212141416710121414161618bbbb7101012121414167101012121414167101012121414164550UNDER 750c750150015006000OVER 600010121416161820221214162020262428bbb
27、b810101212141416810121414161820101214161618202255UNDER 750c750150015006000OVER 600012141618202222241418202424302632abbbb8101012141616181012141616182022101216182022222460UNDER 750c750150015006000OVER 60001618202426303032a20242632a3240a3644abbbb1012121414182022121416181822242614162022242626286570dUNDE
28、R 750c750150015006000OVER 6000182024262832a3034a20262836a3442a3846abbbb101212161620222414161820222426301416202226282830Notes:a) When a site-specific investigation indicates a high probability of continuing crashes or when such occurrences are indicated by crash history, the designer may provide clea
29、r-zone distances greater than the clear zone shown in Table 3-1. Clear zones may be limited to 30 ft for practicality and to provide a consistent roadway template if previous experience with similar projects or designs indicates satisfactory performance.b) Because recovery is less likely on the unsh
30、ielded, traversable 1V:3H fill slopes, fixed objects should not be present in the vicinity of the toe of these slopes. Recovery of high-speed vehicles that encroach beyond the edge of the shoulder may be expected to occur beyond the toe of slope. Determination of the width of the recovery area at th
31、e toe of slope should consider right-of-way availability, environmental concerns, economic factors, safety needs, and crash histories. Also, the distance between the edge of the through traveled lane and the beginning of the 1V:3H slope should influence the recovery area provided at the toe of slope
32、. While the application may be limited by several factors, the foreslope parameters that may enter into determining a maximum desirable recovery area are illustrated in Figure 3-2. A 10-ft recovery area at the toe of slope should be provided for all traversable, non recoverable fill slopes. c) For r
33、oadways with low volumes it may not be practical to apply even the minimum values found in Table 3-1. Refer to Chapter 12 for additional considerations for low-volume roadways and Chapter 10 for additional guidance for urban applications.d) When design speeds are greater than the values provided, th
34、e designer may provide clear-zone distances greater than those shown in Table 3-1.The designer may choose to modify the clear-zone distances in Table 3-1 with adjustment factors to account for horizontal curvature, as shown in Table 3-2. These modifications normally are considered only when crash hi
35、stories indicate such a need, when a specific site investigation shows a definitive crash potential that could be significantly lessened by increasing the clear zone width, and when such increases are cost-effective. Horizontal curves, particularly for high-speed facilities, are usually superelevate
36、d to increase safety and provide a more comfortable ride. Increased banking on curves where the superelevation is inadequate is an alternate method of increasing roadway safety within a horizontal curve, except where snow and ice conditions limit the use of increased superelevation.Highlighted Text
37、Changed in July 2015 Errata 2011 by the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials.All rights reserved. Duplication is a violation of applicable law.Roadside Topography and Drainage Features 3-21Through Traveled Way 7 m 23 ft 4 m 13 ft Runout Area 110 13.518DiscussionSince th
38、e non-recoverable foreslope is within the recommended suggested clear-zone distance of the 1V:10H foreslope, a runout area beyond the toe of the non-recoverable foreslope is desirable. Using the steepest recoverable foreslope before or after the non-recoverable foreslope, a clear-zone distance is se
39、lected from Table 3-1. In this example, the 1V:8H foreslope beyond the base of the fill dictates a 9 to 10 m 30 to 32 ft clear-zone distance. Since 7 m 23 ft are available at the top, an additional 2 to 3 m 7 to 10 ft could be provided at the bottom. Since this is less than the 3 m 10 ft recovery ar
40、ea that should be provided at the toe of all the non-recoverable slopes the 3 m 10 ft should be applied. All foreslope breaks may be rounded and no fixed objects would normally be built within the upper or lower portions of the clear-zone or on the intervening foreslope.EXAMPLE 3-DDesign ADT: 12,000
41、Design Speed: 110 km/h 70 mphSuggested clear-zone distance for 1V:6H foreslope: 9 to 10.5 m 30 to 34 ft (from Table 3-1)1611ThroughTraveled Way3 m 10 ft 4 m 13 ft 2 m 7 ftShoulderDiscussionSince the critical foreslope is within the suggested clear-zone distance of 9 to 10.5 m 30 to 34 ft, it should
42、be flattened if practical or considered for shielding. However, if this is an isolated obstacle and the roadway has no significant crash history, it may be appropriate to do little more than delineate the drop-off in lieu of foreslope flattening or shielding.September 2011 Errata 2011 by the America
43、n Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials.All rights reserved. Duplication is a violation of applicable law.Roadside Design Guide3-26EXAMPLE 3-K 3.5 m to 4.5 m 12 ft to 14 ftClear Zone for Inside RadiusShoulderRampShoulder5.3 m to 6.8 m 18 ft to 21 ftClear Zone for Outside Radius16
44、16Clear Zone for Simple Ramps Cross Section Curve 1Curve 1Design ADT: 1.2 m 4 ft Highlighted Text Changed in July 2015 Errata 2011 by the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials.All rights reserved. Duplication is a violation of applicable law.Erecting Mailboxes on Streets
45、 and Highways 11-7surface treatment course to accommodate multiple patron use. Special measures also may be needed where highway traffic conditions encourage hard braking or high acceleration by vehicles entering or exiting the mailbox turnout. Edge dropoffs often are found at rural mailbox location
46、s. The daily use by the delivery vehicles may loosen the soil at the edge of the pavement. When the soil at the edge is eroded, a drop of 100 mm 4 in. or more may result. These edge dropoffs can make it difficult for drivers to safely return to the pavement if the vehicle strays onto the unstable so
47、il. The use of paved turnouts is one solution. An-other approach is a recent paving innovation called the Safety Edge, which shapes the edge of the traveled way into a 30 degree angle rather than a vertical drop. This new angle is optimal in allowing motorists to return their vehicle to the pavement
48、 without overcor-recting or losing control.Drivers usually are required to slow their vehicles in traffic, which increases the risk of a crash. The ideal way to minimize this risk is to provide a speed-change lane. A wide surface-treated shoulder is ideal for this purpose. Unfortunately, suitable sh
49、oulders are not available at most mailbox turnout locations and it would be far too expensive to provide shoulders or turnouts that would allow a speed change outside the traveled way. Figure 11-5 presents a mailbox turnout layout considered appropriate for different traffic conditions.The minimum space needed for maneuvering to a parallel position in a
