27. The expert from Germany introduced GRSP-64-20, to clarify different interpretations on vehicle configuration testing in the presence of active suspensions, which arose in off-road driving (SUVs mostly) or driving in a car park (sports cars). He concluded that since the vehicle height had an influence on the headform test area 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 relevant for impact with a pedestrian. The expert of OICA agreed that the issue raised by Germany was valid and that there was a need to avoid different interpretations, but this needs to be studied carefully, also in relation to the normal procedure of “worst case definition”. He added that this would entail new requirements, therefore needing a series of amendments and transitional provisions. He also added that this issue should be considered in the ongoing WP.29 discussions on the performance of vehicles outside the test boundaries defined in the various UN Regulations. The expert from the Netherlands suggested developing simulation models to check worst case testing. The expert from OICA stressed that testing a vehicle in all potential configurations would be unrealistic and therefore welcomed the statements from the Netherlands. He referred to the work on the certification of automated vehicles whereby an additional 3-pillar approach was considered to address automation:

1. test track,
2. road test and
3. simulation and audit of development process.

28. The Chair of GRSP suggested establishing a group of interested experts to further develop the proposal. GRSP agreed with the proposal of its Chair. The expert from Germany announced a possible meeting before 15 February 2019, to submit a new official proposal. Finally, GRSP requested the secretariat to keep GRSP-64-20 as a reference in the agenda of the May 2019 session.

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.

9. The expert from the Republic of Korea, Chair of the IWG on Deployable Pedestrian Protection Systems (DPPS) introduced GRSP-64-36 to inform GRSP about the status of the IWG work. He explained that the group had last convened in Geneva on 11 December 2018. He added that the group was working to develop new and more detailed requirements to ensure that deployable systems were correctly activated as designed to protect pedestrians and other vulnerable road users. He underlined that among the major issues was the validation of the Head Impact Time (HIT) determination procedure and that the group was considering both numerical simulation and physical dummy testing. The expert from OICA stated that when numerical simulation was conducted, the manufacturer should provide supporting evidence showing the appropriateness of the simulation tool and suitable biofidelity and kinematics of the chosen numerical models. Therefore, he recommended that the walking posture of the model should be in M.R.1. and be updated regularly. The expert from the Republic of Korea concluded that IWG also was considering the development of a corresponding proposal to amend UN Regulation No. 127. GRSP agreed to resume consideration on this agenda item at its May 2019 session.

49. The expert from Japan introduced GRSP-64-41 on the current research programme in his country on improving pedestrian safety. He added that notwithstanding successful national regulatory efforts, pedestrians still accounted for the largest proportion of recent fatal traffic accidents. He concluded that performance protection such as at A-pillar would be increased by airbag deployment.