GAR | FI-21-04

1	2	4
Document Title	Proposals for changes to the ECE-R 94: Dummy position, seat position, and injury risk values
Reference Number	FI-21-04
Date	11 Sep 2013
Source(s)	BASt
Rulemaking Area(s)	UN R94 Frontal Collision Protection
Meeting(s)	FI \| Session 21 \| 11 Jun 2013 3.3.2. Test Set Configuration - Barrier, Dummy, Criteria Limits
Downloads
UNECE server	.pdf format
Excerpts from session reports related to this document
FI \| Session 21 \| 11 Jun 2013		THIRD BAST PRESENTATION (FI-21-04): Proposal for Changes to the ECE-R 94 to address acceleration induced injuries – Dummy position – Seat position – Injury risk values CLEPA (C.Sunnevang, Autoliv) comments that the wording used in the presentation could be clarified: acceleration induced means the pulse (acceleration of the car), and not any acceleration on the dummy. - Discussion on the dummy age and dummy size: Pierre Castaing recalls that if only the elderly age for the whole scenario is chosen, then car manufacturers would be pushed towards a softer restraint system. The situation of a 35yo male at higher speed (more energy) should also be taken into account. Regulation 94 aims at covering the whole population. As an example in helmets regulation, the compromise chosen for a low pulse (low acceleration) is not necessarily optimized for a higher acceleration. Regarding the legs of the 5th dummy, OICA (A.Pott) underlines that there is no calibration procedure because they are not used in the US FMVSS 208. If the proposal is to have a 5th in the intrusion test (ODB), the group has to keep in mind that there might be some question marks with the calibration, and repeatability of this leg. Furthermore, the dummies placements were deeply discussed one year ago. The group had in mind to cover most of our customers. Therefore it was decided not to change the intrusion test (ODB) and therefore to keep both driver and passenger 50th dummies. OICA strongly proposes again not to change the dummies in the ODB test. OICA (I.Dausse) adds that any change in the ODB protocol would go against harmonization (China, Brazil…). Pierre Castaing states that going to an extremely low chest deflection with HIII rodpot would go to the limit of confidence of measurement of the rodpot system, and could lead to less coverage of the real world. He recalls that the group already decided to keep the chest deflection criteria for 5th HIII dummy at 45yo: chest deflexion: 34mm corresponding to 50% risk, 5th, 65 chest deflexion: 45mm corresponding to 50% risk, 5th, 45 An alternative could be to keep the 45mm for the 5th dummy, and stating that it is for 65yo with higher than 50% risk.