Documents (Latest posted on 4 Mar 2021)
Related Meetings : Working Party on Passive Safety | Session 54
Documentation Discussion/Report

4. The expert from Japan, whose country was the technical sponsor of the UN Global Technical Regulation (UN GTR) No. 7 Phase 2, informed GRSP about the outcome of the last meeting (GRSP-54-30), held on 10-11 September 2013 in (Gothenburg), Sweden, of the informal working group (IWG) developing the draft UN GTR. The expert from Germany, made a presentation (GRSP-54-28) of the workshop held in Bergisch Gladbach (16 July 2013), Germany, aimed at defining a procedure for the test position of the Biofidelic Rear Impact Dummy (BioRID II). He added that as a result of the workshop, experts agreed that the use of the Head Restraint Measuring Device (HRMD) was no longer needed for static assessment and BioRID positioning. He concluded that test procedures and injury criteria would likely be finalized in the next meeting of the IWG scheduled for 4-6 February 2014 in Brussels. The expert from the United Kingdom introduced, for information, the latest stage of the draft UN GTR (ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2013/24) and a draft Addendum 1 (GRSP-54-05) to the Mutual Resolution No. 1 (M.R.1). He explained that a revised official proposal of UN GTR would be submitted by the IWG at the May 2014 session of GRSP as well as a final draft addendum to M.R.1.

5. The Chair of GRSP clarified that specification and tolerances for the three-dimensional H-point machine (3-D H) would not yet be part of a draft addendum to the M.R.1 due to the priority given to the BioRID specification. However, GRSP agreed to recommend that the IWG discuss whether the 3-D H should be specific to the UN GTR No. 7 (and UN Regulation No. 17) or whether it should refer to another existing UN GTR and UN Regulation, at least until a draft addendum to the M.R.1 is proposed in the future.

6. The expert from the Netherlands introduced ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2013/17, aimed at increasing the height of the head restraint at the front driver seating position, to cover taller occupants, and decreasing the lowest height of head restraints at the front passenger seating positions for reason of visibility. The expert from the United States of America argued (GRSP-54-23) a lack of rational for both proposed height values. The expert from OICA renewed his concern (GRSP-54-18-Rev.1) that the new measurement procedure would reduce the measured height by 30 mm; and that associated with the new limit of 830 mm would result in increasing the height of the head restraints by 60 mm compared to the current requirements. Finally, GRSP agreed to resume consideration of this agenda item on the basis of final proposals submitted by the IWG and of further justification concerning ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2013/17 and to keep GRSP-54-18- Rev.1 and GRSP-54-23 as references.