| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Document Title | Robustness of SN02 prototype test results | ||||||||
| Reference Number | GTR9-02-04 | ||||||||
| Date |
13 Apr 2012
|
||||||||
| Summary | Information concerning the durability of the Flex-GTR SN02 prototype pursuant to tests conducted at BASt. | ||||||||
| Source(s) | BASt | ||||||||
| Rulemaking Area(s) | GTR No. 9 Pedestrian Safety (GTR) | ||||||||
| Meeting(s) | |||||||||
| Downloads | |||||||||
| UNECE server | .pdf format | ||||||||
| Excerpts from session reports related to this document | |||||||||
| GTR9 | Session 2 | 28-29 Mar 2012 |
Mr. Zander presented the experiences of three years of inverse certification testing with the prototype legform SN-02 (see document GTR9-2-04). Dr. Otubushin asked whether BASt has an explanation for the decay of the test results in the 2nd test reported. Mr. Zander replied that they do not have such an explanation. Dr. Otubushin also wondered what the reasons for the large scatter in the rebound phase of the impactor may be: while the test results show good repeatability for the first peak the scatter becomes up to 50% during the rebound phase and seems to be uncontrollable. Dr. Otubuhsin added that this should not be seen as criticism against the legform but that needs to be considered for the assessment of the vehicle results. Ms. Chaka asked for clarification of the changes to the impactor in between the tests. Mr. Zander replied that only very limited changes were done, only the string pots were replaced and it needs to be added that the length of the rubber has changed some when during the tests. Mr. Pingston added that this is a good study but due to the fact that SN-02 still has polyester bone core material it may be outdated. Mr. Zander and Mr. Gehring offered to do a similar assessment for SN-04 provided that all certification data will be made available by the owners of the data. Messrs. Zander and Gehring will try to get the respective approvals. Dr. Ries wondered why some of the early tests results are shown as non-compliant despite the data produced with this legform were also used for the definition of the certification corridors. Mr. Zander confirmed that some of the test results were not considered since they were considered to be outliers of a larger number of test results. The chair added that following the long-time experiences reported by OICA during the past meeting Humanetics proposed to add screw holes to tighten some screws that were found to be lose (see one section in document GTR9-2-08). Mr. Burleigh highlighted that this will work for the femur section but will not work to the tibia section due to a wire that is fitted there. Dr. Konosu recommended to not apply this change but to recommend in the PADI that this should be inspected in defined intervals and how this can be done. This was finally agreed. |
||||||||