Proposal to ensure pedestrian protection across the vehicle height variations that may be produced by an active suspension system.

33. Referring to agenda item 3(b) (see paragraph 8 above), the expert from Germany suggested postponing discussion on GRSP-65-21 to allow careful consideration of the new provisions of the General Safety Regulation of the European Union, which had proposed an extension of the head impact zone. GRSP agreed to defer discussion of GRSP-65-21 to its December 2019 session and to distribute it with an official symbol.

Counter-proposal to document GRSP/2019/18 to address pedestrian safety and active suspensions (a system which could change the vehicle height while driving (up to a defined driving speed, e.g. up to 39 km/h)). Since the vehicle height has an influence on the headform test area (WAD) and on the test results for legform tests, all possible vehicle heights up to a driving speed of 11.1 m/s (40 km/h) should be considered to be relevant for impact with a pedestrian.

20. The expert from Germany reiterated his proposal (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2019/18) and referred to agenda item 3(a) (see paragraph 4). The expert from OICA introduced GRSP-67-07 as a counterproposal, aimed at clarifying the issue that vehicle height has an influence on the test results of headform and legform tests, and consequentially all possible vehicle heights up to a driving speed of 11.1 m/s (40 km/h) should be considered to be relevant for impact with a pedestrian. Germany stated its agreement, in general, with the OICA proposal but suggested further clarifications. GRSP agreed to resume discussion at its December 2020 session on the basis of a potentially revised proposal from the experts of Germany, the United Kingdom and OICA.

Proposal to amend the definitions and specifications as well as the Annex 1, Part 1. It is a revised counterproposal to document ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2019/18 submitted by Germany and the OICA informal document GRSP-67-07.