) SNCLAVALIN _ Ropaarvee associates jy International architects engineers & consultants pvt. itd Independent Engineer for Chennai - Tada section of NH 5 Ref; SNC-AA/CT/W-Beam Barrier/2014/3767 09-08-2014 To: Mr. Elangovan Project Manager L & T Chennai — Tada Tollway Limited (A Subsidiary of L&T IDPL) 2° Floor, Main Control Building, Toll Plaza, GNT Road, NH-5, Nallur Village, Sholavaram Post, Chennai ~ 600 067 Tamil Nadu Tel: 044- 2633 0891 / 93/94 Sub: Installation of W-Beam Barrier - Reg Six ~ Laning of Chennai ~ Tada Section of NH ~ 5 from Km 11.000 to Km 84.400 in the state of Tamil Nadu to be executed as BOT on DBFO Pattern under NHDP Phase V. Ref: Site Inspection on 04" August, 2014. Dear Mr. Elangovan, During our site inspection on 4” August, 2014, along with your representative, we noticed the execution of excavation work with 0.50 m depth of foundation from ground level, for installation of W-Beam Barrier at Ch.52+050 on LHS without raising RFI for our inspection. We have informed the said work is not compliance with the Specifications and Standards. The acceptable Standards shall be followed as per Clause 1.4 under SECTION-1 (GENERAL) of Manual of Specifications and Standards for Six laning of National Highways of Concession Agreement. The Guidelines for installation of traffic safety barriers shall be followed as per Ministry's, Circular no.RWINH-33022/1/94-DO Ill dated 24” June 1994, and the same is enclosed for your ready reference as Annexure-1. The details of locations as well as drawings for the installation of W-Beam Barriers shall be ‘submitted as per the provisions of Concession Agreement. The executed / ongoing work of W-Beam Barrier is not meeting the requirements of Specifications & Standards. It shall be rectified as per above mentioned Ministry's Circular. Sincerely yours, UR IMT RB _ Ch.Murali Krishna Acting Team Leader / Bridge Engineer SNC-Lavalin International - Aarvee Associates, JV Encl: As above ———66+PB-PIU; Chennai - —— Project Office : _ H.No: 17, Harbour Colony, Kolathur, Chennai - 600 099, Temi Nadu, India. Tel: +91-44-96519607; Fax: +91-44-26512608; emall: sncsarvee.chennal@gmail.com Head Office Ravula Resiclency, Srinagar Colony Main Rd., Hyderabad - 500 089, India. Tel: +91-40-23737633; Fox: +91-40-23736977; email: aarvee@aarvee.net; web: www.aarvee.com604/11 mio’ bighway syst is in an inwodueiory sage, it ie therefore, be eased thatthe manufacturers ‘Perience gained, In the meantime, suggestions Buidelines will be appreciated, A Enclosure to Ministry's Circular No.RWINH: Dated 24th June, 1994 poles, tees, bridge supports, simply rolling dow, curves. Additionally. « vit it cia, LO sah ait punfase af shes guidlines Is 5 bing out we ‘design apc OF sly taniers and > Buble the Warranis for teic provision 0 desert information cn various types of safely batriets available -_ Alongwith their sength and Safety chavactersis, dimensional aspects and Jayout deta forte baie, : Revulimist ty vaniee be ya 5 2.1. The basic even For deértinin energy and teduce the SEVERITY of sect ) in sella nasa 16 trafic it should be ae {hielding the hazard, is lower ten whee ing 2 ica be sale) equremenedy on So) 2) ete PM Ong sod ser he impact nd her shuld ne be nylon Petetratetevehiee, lemens which ean 2 mt vbicle should otade only milly iio the ajucent wate ‘oul provide «gous visual pude forthe ced vir > ‘9 Mahou no dees mre than he pace smal or deco, ) . nS2.5, “The mayor facvar vo te considered for the solection of a particular bamrer system isthe maiching siynamie laeral deflection characteristics ef the system lo the space available at site (including space for end treaument) 0 2810 mligate the severity of impact, Cuber factors needing consideration ave inital cos, future maintenance costs nd esthetics. However, enhianceinen’of wehicular safely and ceashworthiness ofthe system should be given more weightage as compared to aesthetics ‘ ‘Types of safety barriers i 3a, The safety barriers can be classified as flexible, semi-rigid, or rigid. The major difference between the various types isthe amount of bares deflection that takes place when the batieris struck. The flexible system isthe ‘ost yielding type and is more for containment than redirogtion of the vehicle and requires more lateral clearence fiom Jixed objects due to deMection during imc, ’Semi-rigid barriers offer requisite resistance 19 control the deflection of Jongitudinal member to an acceptable limit shal We errant vohicle is redirected along the, tavel paui,."The rigid sysiem ‘does not deflect on'impaci but causes the maximum severity of impact, amongst the thee types. AS the angle of impact increases this barrier becomes less forgiving. Installation ofa rigid system should be considered where shallow impact. ‘angles are expected such as along narrow medians or shoulders which could be expected in urban situations. AS te rigid system suffers Title or no darmage on inypact, i requires the least maintenance effors, 32, ‘Safety barriers dealtin these guidelineS ave longitudinal roadside safety barriers, and median safety barriers. Steel barriers of scmirigid type and rigid concrete barriers are described. » ete (TiornosisaoMETATES ne ae 4a“ Warronts 3 4.1.1, The longitudinal roadside barriers are basically ineant to shield wo types of roadside hazards ie, ‘embankments and roadside obstacles and slso for preventing the vehicles veering olf the sharp curves. ‘The warrans for 2 Gill section, in terms of its height and slope, needing protection with roadside barriers are shown in Fig, 1. Itmay be ‘noted that n0 barrier is warranted for enviankment having a fill slope of 3:1 or later. ‘The warrants for roudside objects ace mainly dependent upon the type of obstacle and the probability oftheir being hit.-A barrier should be installed only ‘ifthe resulrof vehicle striking the barriers likely to be less severe than the severity of accident resulting from the vehicle impacting the unshielded obstacte, Judgement of the Enginecr-in-Charge should be applied to arrive atthe necessity of providing a barrier to shield obstacles which cannot be removed. Some of the commonly encountered roadside obstacles ‘ve bridge piers, abutments and railing ends, roadside rock mass, culverts, pipes and bzad walls, cut slopes, reining walls, lighting suppors, traffic sign and sigusl suppor, wees, and utility poles. 42, Types of Rondside Safety lNurrlers 4.2.1.° Types of longitudinal roadside safety barriers which could be used are := i) Pade beam ype ses hier (i) Cone Bouh he sicel barriers are of sng post type und usually remain functional afier moderate collisions thereby + eliminating the need For immediate repair. e 43, Roadside Steel Barriers 43.L Design Aspects bs ‘The "W" beam type safety barier Cosisis ofa steel post and a 3 mm thick "W" beam rail element ‘wiih is spaced away from the posts, The spacer minimises vehicular snagging and reduces the ikeUhood ofa vehicle ‘auling over the barter. ‘The steljosuu! dhe blocking out spacer shall both be channel section of 75 x 150 mm size 5 mm thick, “The el shall be 70cm above the ground level un poss shal be spaced 2m center to center, Typical Geils ie shown in Fig 2