| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Document title | Pedestrian Protection: Assessment with lower legform at BTA limits and beyond | ||||||||||
| Date | 18 Mar 2013 | Review of EEVC and Flex-PLI legform behavior in tests along the bumper test area and bumper corner. | |||||||||
| Source(s) | OICA | ||||||||||
| Status | |||||||||||
| Rulemaking area(s) | |||||||||||
| Meeting(s) | |||||||||||
| Related documents | |||||||||||
| Downloads: | .pdf format | ||||||||||
| Excerpts from session reports related to this document | |||||||||||
| TF-BTA | Session 3 | 18 Mar 2013 |
24. Mr Schmitt pointed out that his company had the same experiences (see document TF-BTA-03-07). [Note of the secretary: The document shown included videos but a version was kindly provided by Mr Schmitt for publication on the Task Force’s website that only includes sketches of the respective impactor behaviour.] He explained that the non-biofidelic behavior is similar for the FlexPLI as well as for the EEVC LFI – bith impactor clearly rotate and slide along the bumper surface. Mr Schmitt wondered how this could be considered in the test procedure. Mr Edwards suggested testing in a normal angle to the bumper but Mr Gehring explained that, from a test labs point of view, it is difficult to define the normal angle since different surfaces at the bumper fascia have different normal angles at the same y-position of a vehicle. |
||||||||||