Proposal to to clarify the provisions for dynamic testing of rear seat system, advanced restraint system approval and transitional provisions prepared by the European Association of Automotive Suppliers (CLEPA) in cooperation with France, Germany, Japan, the Netherlands and the International Organization of Motor Vehicle Manufacturers (OICA). This proposal supersedes GRSP/2015/18 and GRSP-58-35.

Proposal to clarify the testing of seats with and without head restraints. This proposal would allow alternatives at the request of the manufacturer by clarifying that under testing of a bench seat with three seating positions and two head restraints, a moment of 3 × 373Nm shall be applied to the back of seats and of 2 × 373Nm to the head restraints:
(a) If the manufacturer wants to comply with the test requirements of paragraph 6.2. (strength of the seat-back), by the test of head restraint performance of paragraph 6.4., they choose to apply 53 daNm to each seat back without head restraint and 89 daN to each head restraint. In this case only one test shall be performed.
(b) If the manufacturer chooses not to apply 53 daNm, during the test of paragraph 6.4., the seat back strength test of paragraph 6.2. has to be performed in addition to the test of paragraph 6.4.

Proposal to remove references to age limits in preference for limits based on stature in the definition of “infant carrier”, to update the transitional provisions in line with the new guidelines on regulatory procedures (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/1044/Rev.2), especially concerning extensions of approvals, and to replace a reference in para. 16.11 to “vehicle approval” with “Enhanced Child Restraint Systems”.

Proposal to introduce new and modified labeling and to clarify packaging information to distinguish between forward-facing-only, rear-facing-only, and convertible CRS in order to reduce the risk of users misusing these enhanced CRS.

Proposal to introduce provisions for the approval of the booster cushion category of Enhanced Child Restraint Systems.

Proposal to clarify provisions for booster seats under the 02 series of amendments to avoid possible confusion with the provisions for booster cushions in the proposal for the 04 series of amendments (see document GRSP/2018/29). The proposal also adds a missing reference to Appendix 5 of UN R16 that defines envelopes for non-integral Enhanced Child Restraint Systems.

The 01 series of amendments to UN R129 amended the door panel geometry to create a small opening close to the seat bight. This change protected the panel from interaction with the anchorage of the adult seat belt on the test bench (added subsequently in the 02 series). Although Integral ISOFIX Enhanced Child Restraint Systems (ECRS) do not use the belt, these CRS were also required to use this new door panel geometry. This proposal amends the 02 series of amendments to require Integral ISOFIX ECRS to use the original door panel geometry with no opening (except during extensions of approvals in which the new panel geometry was used). The proposal ensures that ISOFIX ECRS designs cannot use the opening to mitigate loads to the ECRS and dummy.

Proposal to clarify provisions for booster seats under the 02 series of amendments to avoid possible confusion with the provisions for booster cushions in the proposal for the 04 series of amendments (see document GRSP/2018/29). The proposal also adds a missing reference to Appendix 5 of UN R16 that defines envelopes for non-integral Enhanced Child Restraint Systems.

Proposal to clarify that modifications need only be notified to the Type Approval Authority when they have an influence on the performance (compliance with technical requirements of UN R16) and/or the documentation required by the UN Regulation.

Proposal to amend the dynamic option of the draft 10 series of amendments (document GRSP/2018/34). CLEPA proposes that injury risk limits should be based not only on the injury risk curves, but also on technical feasibility given the repeatability and reproducibility limits of the BioRID II test tool. This proposal also corrects the definition of T(end) which is different from T-HRC.

Proposal to amend the dynamic option of the proposal of amendment 1 of UN Global Technical Regulation No. 7 submitted by the Informal Working Group on the Phase 2 of UN GTR No. 7 (document GRSP/2018/27).

Proposal to clarify the application of GTR 7 Phase 2 static alternative provisions and to modify the allowed range of tolerances under the backset retention and energy dissipations test. The proposal would re-introduce certain paragraphs in the 09 series of amendments removed by the draft 10 series (GRSP/2018/34). In addition, the proposals adds the area where the gap measurement procedure by the sphere is appropriate per the Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard 202a (i.e. only gaps in the area over 540 mm).

Proposal to amend the static options of the proposal of amendment 1 of UN Global Technical Regulation No. 7 submitted by the Informal Working Group on the Phase 2 of UN GTR No. 7 (document GRSP/2018/27).

Proposal to include booster cushion categories within the scope of the 03 series of amendments to UN R129.

Proposal to amend the static options of the proposal of amendment 1 of UN Global Technical Regulation No. 7 submitted by the Informal Working Group on the Phase 2 of UN GTR No. 7 (document GRSP/2019/5, amended by GRSP-65-24).

Proposal to update a reference with the new European Committee for Standardization (CEN) published EN 71-3:2019 on 10 April 2019 and to delete a cut-and-paste error in Annex 6, Appendix 2 taken from UN R44 referring to ECRS as in the “restricted” category which does not exist in UN R129.

Proposal to update a reference with the new European Committee for Standardization (CEN) published EN 71-3:2019 on 10 April 2019, to delete a cut-and-paste error in Annex 6, Appendix 2 taken from UN R44 referring to ECRS as in the “restricted” category which does not exist in UN R129, and to reconcile and consolidate various references to tolerances for the internal geometry assessment.

Proposal to clarify the requirements for the type approval category of booster seats over 135 cm, to update a reference with the new European Committee for Standardization (CEN) published EN 71-3:2019 on 10 April 2019, to delete a cut-and-paste error in Annex 6, Appendix 2 taken from UN R44 referring to ECRS as in the “restricted” category which does not exist in UN R129, and to reconcile and consolidate various references to tolerances for the internal geometry assessment.

Proposal

• to clarify the requirements for the type approval of booster seats in the over 135 cm category,
• to update a reference with the new European Committee for Standardization (CEN) published EN 71-3:2019 on 10 April 2019,
• to delete a cut-and-paste error in Annex 6, Appendix 2 taken from UN R44 referring to ECRS as in the “restricted” category which does not exist in UN R129,
• to reconcile and consolidate various references to tolerances for the internal geometry assessment, and
• to exclude the head acceleration criterion in certain cases of contact when testing booster cushions with the larger Q-dummies, in particular the Q10, due to dummy rebound over the back of the test bench during a frontal test.

The proposal was prepared by the expert from the European Association of Automotive Suppliers (CLEPA) to clarify aspects the current procedure, formalises the assessment practice and aims to improve the transparency and consistency of Type Approval testing results.

Proposal to introduce provisions for a Digital User Guide.

Proposal to clarify provisions including the Test Report Template and Dimension Assessment Method.

Proposal to clarify that specific vehicle belted Enhanced Child Restraint Systems (ECRS) may be fitted with a support leg, top tether and lower tether attachments. This proposal also amends the existing support leg volume to improve the compatibility between the support leg volume and the Child Restraint Fixtures used for accessing the external dimensions of an ECRS.

Proposal to amend the current support leg volume to improve the compatibility between the support leg volume and the Child Restraint Fixtures used for assessing the external dimensions of an ECRS.

Proposal to amend the current support leg volume to improve the compatibility between the support leg volume and the Child Restraint Fixtures used for assessing the external dimensions of an Enhanced Child Restraint System (ECRS).

Proposal to correct editorial mistakes in the adopted text of the Regulation.

Proposal to correct editorial errors in the adopted text of the Regulation.

Proposal to correct editorial errors in the adopted text of the Regulation.

Proposal for editorial corrections and to harmonize the vertical excursion limit for Q3 and Q6 dummies.

Proposal to prevent the approval mark from being replaced by a Unique Identifier (UI) in UN Regulation No. 16.

Proposal to clarify the conditions under which Enhanced Child Restraint Systems must be tested in a vehicle body shell.

Proposal to correct editorial mistakes found in the 04 series of amendments to UN R129.

Proposal to improve whiplash protection for occupants of smaller stature and, in particular, for female drivers.

Proposal to solve the issue of atypical glass fracture.

Proposal to clarify the text for consistency, including replacement of the wording “torso line” by “median longitudinal plane of the seat” and to align the text with GTR 7 concerning the determination of whether a seat includes a head restraint that must comply with the requirements of this regulation.

Proposal to amend UN Regulation No. 129 to remove rebound head contact from the head acceleration requirement for all Child Restraint Systems. The regulation currently lacks consistency regarding whether rebound head movement is considered in testing. Variations in test bench design cause booster seats to pass in some laboratories but fail in others based solely on rebound contact. The proposal ensures consistency between different CRS types and reproducibility across laboratories with different test bench designs, and aligns with the approach in UN Regulations 94 and 137.

Proposal to correct editorial errors and to insert the word “tolerance” in para. 2.3.3.4.1. The editorial errors originated with documents WP29/2016/58 (relating to GRRF-80-37), GRRF/2015/22 and GRRF-81-04-Rev.1.

Changes to the proposal for amendments to the requirements for Automatically Commanded Steering Functions (ACSF) of Category C, introducing specific provisions for the use of a lane change function with a two-step Human Machine Interface (HMI).

Discussion presentation for adapting UN R13 to electric vehicle systems with regard to the required state of charge of the vehicle battery under downhill and endurance braking test procedures.

Proposal to align the provisions of UN R90 related to approval numbers and markings with the provisions of Schedule 4 to the 1958 Agreement.

This document proposes amendments to the ESC prescribed test conditions in anticipation of future developments in steering systems.

Proposal for amendments to the requirements for Automatically Commanded Steering Functions (ACSF) of Category C, introducing specific provisions for the use of a lane change function with a two-step Human Machine Interface (HMI).

Proposal for amendments to the draft proposal concerning changes to the provisions introduced by the 02 series of amendments for remote-controlled parking (RCP).

Matrix illustrating a possible way that use of simulation, track, and real world testing might be applied to the various automated vehicle safety elements identified by WP.29 Contracting Parties.

Proposal concerning assessment of ACSF Category B1 lane keeping systems. Under Annex 8, proposal to delete the warning-to-deactivation cascade testing at high speed because the capability is already demonstrated under the low-speed test and the high-speed variation effectively requires a test track length of more than two kilometers. The proposal would also clarify paragraph 5.6.2.3.1. regarding the use of inputs other than lane markings where lane markings are not present.

Proposal for modifications to draft tolerances in the testing of ACSF B1 and C systems with regard to lane width, coordinate system, lateral acceleration, and overriding-force test.

The 01 series of amendments aims at increasing the performance requirements in the Car to Pedestrian
scenario by permitting only reduced maximum impact speed compared to the original version of this
Regulation. Thereby the same maximum impact speed is required for the Car to Pedestrian as for the
Car to Car scenario. However, in the original proposal (GRVA/2019/16), the permitted maximum impact speed for an N₁ vehicle erroneously corresponds to that of an M₁ vehicle. This proposal corrects the error.