32. The expert from Netherlands on behalf of a dummy manufacturer introduced GRSP-69-15, explaining that his company would work with any interested parties concerning devices that represent vulnerable occupants. He also offered full cooperation concerning the 50th percentile female dummies and offered to actively support Sweden in the development and evaluation of the respective Anthropomorphic Test Device. The experts from Sweden introduced (GRSP-69-42) reiterating the result of a study conducted in her country showing that adult female were poorly represented by existing dummies. She therefore suggested to start to form an ad hoc group to understand the issue and elaborate a suggestion for terms of reference for an IWG addressing both men and women equally and diversity of occupants to be presented for the December 2021 session of GRSP. She suggested to cooperate with interested Contracting Parties and manufacturers and to invite experts of the Global Forum for Road Traffic Safety (WP.1) and of the Working Party on Regulatory Cooperation and Standardization Policies (WP.6) to join if were still lingering questions. It was noted that possible participation of WP.1 and WP.6 should be consulted with the Administrative Committee on the coordination of work of WP.29 (AC.2) to receive endorsement. GRSP agreed about with suggestion of the expert from Sweden to start consultation with interested parties concerning the issue.

Compressed zip archive containing the FlexPLI drawing package (108 documents)

(zip compressed file)

Presentation on alternatives for bench foam given the unavailability of the previously selected material.

Compressed zip archive containing the FlexPLI drawing package (100+ documents)

Progress report on efforts to evelop certification tests which can control dummy reproducibility.

Update on (new) Certification procedure (Humanetics)

Paul Depinet/Humanetics introduced TEGID-16-02 and TEGID-16-03 on the status of the work related to the certification procedures.

TEGID-16-03 describes the draft BioRID certification procedure in detail. This document shall form the basis for inclusion into the Mutual Resolution No. 1. Feedback is needed as soon as possible as this document shall be sent to the UN secretariat with regard to format and formal questions, too.

The drawings (also CAD) are now in the Humanetics system. An update of the group on this issue is planned for the next face to face meeting.

Paul Depinet reported (TEGID-16-02) that a larger team is now working at Humanetics on this issue. The chair of the GTR No. 7 group and the chair of the BioRID TEG expressed their thanks to Humanetics for this support.

Good progress has been made during the last weeks. However, there is still some work to be done.

New tighter corridors are proposed for many criteria.

It was mentioned that the current procedure for the measurement of head rotation using the pots might have some potential for errors and the use of a video system was discussed. Johan Davidsson (Chalmers) said that based on his experience video analysis could be used. However, the current wording of the certification procedure does not include a procedure and requirements for using video systems. Jack Jenson (GM) had the view that a uniform procedure should be used in regulation and that there is not much experience with video analysis of BioRID head rotation during certification. Consequently, further discussion on this issue should be considered in the future.

Koshiro Ono (JARI) raised concerns about the biofidelity of the BioRID. Looking at all the changes of the BioRID and the certification procedure he has pointed out that the
biofidelity should be ensured. Johan Davidsson referred to the EEVC WG 12 work on the BioRID. Bernd Lorenz explained that all the work that has been done in the last years had the aim to improve R&R of the BioRID. All dummies used for this work (and the EEVC studies) had passed the old certification procedure which was meant to ensure biofidelity. So, biofidelity of the BioRID should not be worsened.

Humanetics reported that stiffness measurement of the bumpers using a durometer has a bad R&R. The use of a universal test machine could give some improvement. One drawback could be a material change used for the bumpers. It seems that the supplier of the bumpers has changed the recipe (softeners) as from 2013 onwards. This is leading to an unexpected accelerated aging of the material (increasing stiffness). Humanetics is asking group members (and their experts on plastics) for advice.

Preparation for Brussels meeting

Group members are asked to read/check the documents (TEGID-16-02, TEGID-16-03) carefully and to provide feedback for the face to face meeting in Brussels. All members are asked to help Humanetics with expert advice regarding plastics esp. softeners under the new environmental/health protection requirements.

Draft BioRID Dummy Certification Procedures to ensure proper dummy performance. These procedures include multiple tests to verify system inputs and two tests to verify dummy performance.

Update on (new) Certification procedure (Humanetics)

Paul Depinet/Humanetics introduced TEGID-16-02 and TEGID-16-03 on the status of the work related to the certification procedures.

TEGID-16-03 describes the draft BioRID certification procedure in detail. This document shall form the basis for inclusion into the Mutual Resolution No. 1. Feedback is needed as soon as possible as this document shall be sent to the UN secretariat with regard to format and formal questions, too.

The drawings (also CAD) are now in the Humanetics system. An update of the group on this issue is planned for the next face to face meeting.

Paul Depinet reported (TEGID-16-02) that a larger team is now working at Humanetics on this issue. The chair of the GTR No. 7 group and the chair of the BioRID TEG expressed their thanks to Humanetics for this support.

Good progress has been made during the last weeks. However, there is still some work to be done.

New tighter corridors are proposed for many criteria.

It was mentioned that the current procedure for the measurement of head rotation using the pots might have some potential for errors and the use of a video system was discussed. Johan Davidsson (Chalmers) said that based on his experience video analysis could be used. However, the current wording of the certification procedure does not include a procedure and requirements for using video systems. Jack Jenson (GM) had the view that a uniform procedure should be used in regulation and that there is not much experience with video analysis of BioRID head rotation during certification. Consequently, further discussion on this issue should be considered in the future.

Koshiro Ono (JARI) raised concerns about the biofidelity of the BioRID. Looking at all the changes of the BioRID and the certification procedure he has pointed out that the
biofidelity should be ensured. Johan Davidsson referred to the EEVC WG 12 work on the BioRID. Bernd Lorenz explained that all the work that has been done in the last years had the aim to improve R&R of the BioRID. All dummies used for this work (and the EEVC studies) had passed the old certification procedure which was meant to ensure biofidelity. So, biofidelity of the BioRID should not be worsened.

Humanetics reported that stiffness measurement of the bumpers using a durometer has a bad R&R. The use of a universal test machine could give some improvement. One drawback could be a material change used for the bumpers. It seems that the supplier of the bumpers has changed the recipe (softeners) as from 2013 onwards. This is leading to an unexpected accelerated aging of the material (increasing stiffness). Humanetics is asking group members (and their experts on plastics) for advice.

Preparation for Brussels meeting

Group members are asked to read/check the documents (TEGID-16-02, TEGID-16-03) carefully and to provide feedback for the face to face meeting in Brussels. All members are asked to help Humanetics with expert advice regarding plastics esp. softeners under the new environmental/health protection requirements.