Below is the uncorrected machine-read text of this chapter, intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text of each book. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.
7 C H A P T E R 3 3.1 Discussion of Acceptance Conditions for Agencies Table 3-1 summarizes the proposed guideline using the framework of the ETAG 27 guideline. The proposed guide- line has been developed to be consistent with the ETAG 27 guideline to allow for acceptance of ETAG 27 testing for rock- fall fence systems installed in the United States. The following are the primary differences between the proposed guideline and the ETAG 27 guideline: â¢ If performing testing in the United States, the manufac- turer would be responsible for performing the test because there are currently no governing bodies for rockfall fence testing in the United States. â¢ The test rock or block may be natural or manufactured. A current obstacle for agencies is fully evaluating the accept- ability of the rockfall fence system because the manufacturer- provided certification documentation of ETAG 27 tests lacks the details necessary for agencies to determine if the system meets their project-specific requirements. However, per the ETAG 27 guidelines, much of this information is recorded during the test and could be made available at the request of the agency as discussed in Section 3.2. 3.2 Proposed Data Request Form for ETAG 27 Tested Systems The proposed data request form (Table 3-2) would allow agencies to request information and data that are required per the ETAG 27 guideline, but may not be included in typical certification or test documentation. With this information, agencies can evaluate the ETAG 27 tested system for confor- mance with a project-specific specification of the rockfall fence system performance. It may be useful for agencies to include this form in their rockfall fence system specifications. Proposed ETAG 27 Acceptance Procedures for Agencies
8Guideline ETAG 27 Proposed(Accept ETAG 27) Location of Development European Union United States Test Responsibility Governing Body Manufacturer Rock/Block Delivery Method Vertical drop or inclined cable Vertical drop or inclined cable Rock/Block Type Manufactured Manufactured or natural Fence Height Unlimited Unlimited Post Spacing/Panel Width Unlimited Unlimited Small Diameter Rock/Block Test No No MEL/SEL 3 3 Tests at Low Energy (SEL) 2 2 Tests at High Energy (MEL) 1 1 Residual Height at SEL 1 st Test: > 70% 2nd Test: Unlimited 1st Test: > 70% 2nd Test: Unlimited at MEL Category A, B, C Category A, B, C Elongation at SEL Unlimited Unlimited at MEL Unlimited Unlimited Maintenance Not evaluated Not evaluated Table 3-1. Summary and comparison of the ETAG 27 and the proposed guidelines. Table 3-2. Proposed data request form for ETAG 27 rockfall fence testing. ETAG 27 ROCKFALL FENCE TEST DATA REQUEST FORM This form is intended to be used by federal and state transportation agencies to request rockfall fence test data for fences that have been tested and approved according to ETAG 27. Agencies may send this form to the fence manufacturer to request the documentation and data described below. The manufacturer may fill in the appropriate information and complete the checklist providing the requested information or the manufacturer may provide a separate report containing the requested information. Manufacturer Fence Model/Type Energy Level Classification/Energy Test Institution Test Location Rock/Block Delivery Vertical DropInclined CableMethod Date of Testing Date of Approval DOCUMENTATION AND TEST DATA CHECKLIST Provide system documentation including plans, installation manual/guide, and description of system components. Verify and document that ropes, cables, nets, posts, and other components used in the U.S. have equivalent strength as those tested according to ETAG 27. Nominal Height Post Dimensions (Width/Flange/Thickness) Post to Foundation Connection Type Panel Width/Post Spacing Panel Type Applied Mesh Type Retaining Rope Dimensions Anchor Type and Diameter Type and locations of Energy Dissipating Devices
9 Table 3-2. (Continued). ETAG 27 ROCKFALL FENCE TEST DATA REQUEST FORM (CONTINUED) Second Service Energy Level (SEL) Test Data Block Energy at Impact Residual Height Maximum Elongation Braking Time Force Measurements Provide a description below of fence behavior including damage and deformations of components. Maximum Energy Level (MEL) Test Data Maintenance performed after SEL tests Block Energy at Impact Residual Height Category A CB Repair Replacement None Residual Height Maximum Elongation Braking Time Force Measurements Provide a description below of fence behavior including damage and deformations of components. Manufacturer Representative Signature and Date (Attach Original ETAG 27 Document) First Service Energy Level (SEL) Test Data Block Energy at Impact Residual Height Maximum Elongation Braking Time Force Measurements Provide a description below of fence behavior including damage and deformations of components.