Optimal design and dynamic impact tests of removable bollards
Anti-ram bollard systems, which are installed around buildings and infrastructure, can prevent unauthorized vehicles from entering, maintain distance from vehicle-borne improvised explosive devices (VBIED) and reduce the corresponding damage. Compared with a fixed bollard system, a removable bollard system provides more flexibility as it can be removed when needed. This paper first proposes a new type of K4-rated removable anti-ram bollard system. To simulate the collision of a vehicle hitting the bollard system, a finite element model was then built and verified through comparison of numerical simulation results and existing experimental results. Based on the orthogonal design method, the factors influencing the safety and economy of this proposed system were examined and sorted according to their importance. An optimal design scheme was then produced. Finally, to validate the effectiveness of the proposed design scheme, four dynamic impact tests, including two front impact tests and two side impact tests, have been conducted according to BSI Specifications. The residual rotation angles of the specimen are smaller than 30º and satisfy the requirements of the BSI Specification.
Keywordsremovable anti-ram bollards optimal design orthogonal design method dynamic impact test
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- BSI (2007), Specification for Vehicle Security Barriers, PAS 68:2007.Google Scholar
- FEMA (2003), Reference Manual to Mitigate Potential Terrorist Attacks Against Building, Federal Emergency Management Agency, US.Google Scholar
- Guo Xuebing (2007), “Mixed Orthogonal Structure and Approximate Orthogonal,” Master Thesis (Tutor Pang Shanqi), Henan Normal University. (in Chinese)Google Scholar
- Hu Bo, Li Guoqiang, Chen Suwen (2011), “State-of-the-Art Review on Anti-ram Bollards,” Applied Mechanics and Materials, 90–93. (Vol.(Issue No.))Google Scholar
- Ivory MA (2005a), Crash Test Report for Perimeter Barriers and Gates Tested to SD-STD-02.01, Revision A. No. TR-P25039-02-NC, Adelanto: KARCO Engineering, LLC.Google Scholar
- Ivory MA (2005b), Crash Test Report for Perimeter Barriers and Gates Tested to SD-STD-02.01, Revision A. No. TR-P25076-01-NC, Adelanto: KARCO Engineering, LLC.Google Scholar
- Ivory MA (2006), Crash Test Report for Perimeter Barriers and Gates Tested to SD-STD-02.01, Revision A. No. TR-P26212-01-NC, Adelanto: KARCO Engineering, LLC.Google Scholar
- Jin Liangchao (1998), Orthogonal Design and Multiple Indicator Analysis, Beijing: China Railway Press (in Chinese).Google Scholar
- Lan Shengrui, Crawford JE and Xin Xudong (2006), “Development of Shallow Footing Anti-ram Bollard System Through Modeling and Testing,” Transactions of Tianjin University, 12(S1): 46–50.Google Scholar
- Omar TA, Bedewi NE (2009), “New Shallow Foundation Security Barriers for Urban Applications–FEA and Certified Actual Crash Test”, Proceedings of the ASME 2009 International Mechanical Engineering Congress & Exposition, November 13-19, Lake Buena Vista, FL, USA.Google Scholar
- Xiao Yan, Chen Lin, Xiao Guo et al. (2013), “Vehicle Crash Testing Study of Bollard,” Journal of Vibration and Shock, 32(11): 1–6 (in Chinese).Google Scholar