Proposal from the Bumper Test Area Task Force, submitted as an alternative to the proposal in document GRSP/2014/17 as amended by document GRSP-56-38, to revise the procedure for determining the bumper test area under the pedestrian safety regulation. This proposal corrects shortcomings in the current definitions which could lead to a narrower test area than intended (leading to less effective pedestrian protection). This proposal includes a “bumper beam” determination method.
6. The expert from EC introduced GRSP-57-15-Rev.1, superseding ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2015/2, and proposing the introduction of the definition of rigid bumper beam in the test area in addition to the proposed bumper test method with the flexible pedestrian legform impactor (FlexPLI). The expert from OICA introduced GRSP-57-12, explaining that the new definition of the test area leads to test bumper surfaces at an angle greater than the justified 30°. He added that this might result in occurrence of total and relative rotation of the leg as well as sliding along the surface and produce non-repeatable data. The expert from the United States of America requested a study reservation on this proposal based on the above concern regarding the test tool’s repeatability at an impact angle of 30 degrees or higher. She announced that results of this research would be available at the December 2015 session of GRSP. The expert from Japan proposed to share data from his country to be included in the cost benefit analysis. GRSP agreed to resume discussion on this subject and on the pending issues of the proposal of amendments to the UN GTR (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2014/15, ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2014/16 and ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2015/2) at its December 2015 session.
8. The expert from EC introduced ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2014/17 and ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2014/30, submitted by the Task Force on Bumper Test Area (TF-BTA), a subgroup of the Informal Working Group on global technical regulation No. 9 – Phase 2, and proposing an amendment to the provisions of the bumper test. He explained that the current provisions allow the area to be narrower than intended in the provisions of the UN GTR. He added that ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2014/17 was proposing a new method by introducing a practical determination of angle surfaces, to be tested with the FlexPLI, by using a corner gauge. Moreover, he explained that ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2014/30 was proposing the introduction of the definition of rigid bumper beam in the test area in addition to the above-mentioned new test method. He finally informed GRSP that a test report on research conducted by EC on this issue was available. The expert from Japan gave a presentation (GRSP-56-03) to support ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2014/17. The expert from Korea presented GRSP-56-20 supporting ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2014/30. The expert from OICA introduced GRSP-56-30, supporting the new method as proposed by ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2014/17, because the test is less sensitive to specific design features and it could be performed without disassembling parts. Moreover, GRSP discussed GRSP-56-38 and GRSP-56-39, superseding respectively ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2014/17 and ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2014/30.
9. GRSP endorsed GRSP-56-39, but did not support GRSP-56-38. The secretariat was requested to distribute GRSP-56-39 with an official symbol for consideration at its May 2015 session. It was agreed that this proposal would be discussed further by the Contracting Parties under the 1998 Agreement and by GRSP at its next session as a full package with: (i) an updated draft proposal of Phase 2 of the UN GTR (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2014/15) and (ii) an updated final report of the IWG (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2014/16).
| GRSP/2014/30 | |
| GRSP/2014/17 | |
| GRSP-56-38 | |
| GRSP/2015/2 |