I received the email below. I believe the short answer is no, this barrier was only evaluated under NCHRP 350 for TL-2 applications but I thought I would just confirm with you. Also, I know there probably hasn’t been a lot of MASH testing on TL-2 concrete barriers but if anything comes to mind that I can point Steven to, please send that information or contact.
Company: Basis Partners
I'm a civil engineer looking for low-profile barrier designs that a local municipality in Colorado can use on low-speed residential streets. My company doesn't have any business in Kansas, but I found KDOT Standard Detail RD625B and it has piqued my interest. This shape appears to match the precast MASH-tested shape that TxDOT recently tested. Unlike TxDOT, this KDOT standard is meant to be cast-in-place and permanent, which is exactly what I'm looking for. Do you have documentation that shows that the KDOT low profile barrier design is MASH TL-2 compliant? I really appreciate any info you can provide!
You are correct that the attached barrier has only been evaluated for TL-2 applications.
With that said, we recently developed a TL-2 parapet and bike rail system for Iowa that included a MASH TL-2 parapet design - https://mwrsf.unl.edu/researchhub/files/Report385/TRP-03-408-20.pdf
That parapet was a vertical parapet that was 24” tall by 10” wide and used #4 stirrups at 24” spacing with four #4 longitudinal bars.
The NCHRP 350 design you attached was 20” tall by 11” wide at the base/14” wide at the top and used #3 stirrups at 24” spacing with seven #3 longitudinal bars. I have not run a strength analysis to check this barrier with increased height against the MASH TL-2 parapet design.
A couple of options exist.
Let me know if that helps. I think that option 1 may be the simplest, but that would be up to the end users.