GRSP Inf. Group on Child Restraint Systems CRS-31-08

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Motion and Force A. Motion 1. Motion is a change in position
Advertisements

1 KOREA GTR No.7 2 nd Phase Research Results Dec. 8, 2009 Ministry of Land, Transport and Maritime Affairs, Korea Automobile Testing and Research Institute.
51 st GRSP Session Draft new Regulation on child restraint systems Pierre CASTAING Informal document GRSP (51 st GRSP, May 2012, agenda item.
Child safety with respect to vehicle protection and booster seats - a proposal for a CRF for children > 4yo 1 Informal document GRSP (55 th GRSP,
Information for the Flexible Pedestrian Legform Impactor (Flex-PLI)
47th GRSP Session Status report of Informal Group on CRS Pierre CASTAING Chairman Informal Document No. GRSP (47th session, May 2010, agenda.
Impact-Shield Type CRS in JNCAP National Agency for Automotive Safety and Victims ’ Aid Informal document No. GRSP Rev.1 (43rd GRSP, May 2008.
Utac Comparison tests on full crash test facility and hyge sled test facility in the frame of Regulation ECE R16.
2014 KNCAP Updated Status Korea Ministry of Land, Infrastructure and Transport Submitted by the expert from Republic of Korea Informal document GRSP
ECE Regulation N°94 & N°13X 19/05/201455th Session GRSP May 2014 Status report IWG FI 55th session of GRSP May 2014 Informal document GRSP
GRSP December 2004 The Safety of Wheelchair Occupants in Road Transport Vehicles Donald Macdonald Head of Engineering and Research Mobility & Inclusion.
STATUS OF CRS IN BUSES AND COACHES 44TH GRSP (9-12 DECEMBER) Informal document No. GRSP (44th GRSP, December 2008, agenda item 19(b))
44th GRSP Session Status report of Informal Group on CRS Pierre CASTAING Chairman Informal Document No. GRSP (44th session, December 2008,
46th GRSP Session Status report of Informal Group on CRS Pierre CASTAING Chairman Informal Document No. GRSP (46th session, December 2009,
Proposal Regarding Amendment of the CRS Regulation at ECE/GRSP’s CRS Informal Group 2 September 2008 JASIC Japan Automobile Standards Internationalization.
Work, Energy, Power and Conservation Laws. In this week we will introduce the following concepts: o Kinetic energy of a moving object o Work done by a.
Difference of TRL legform impactor/injury criteria and Flex pedestrian legform impactor/injury criteria 16 May 2011 Japan Informal document GRSP
1 Research on Chest Injury Criteria JASIC 54 th GRSP December, 2013 Submitted by the expert from Japan Informal document GRSP (54 th GRSP,
Introduction to Revision of GTR 7
Short Report Status of GTR No. 7/BioRID TEG
Motion in One Dimension. Displacement  x = x f - x i.
Work and Energy 5. What is a force? a. change in speed over time b. the tendency to resist change in motion c. a push or pull d. apparent weightlessness.
Japan’s Stance for the R129 Phase 2 43 rd GRSP Informal Group on Child Restraint System 25 th Mar JASIC.
Japanese Proposal for the New Regulation JASIC / Japan GRSP Inf. Group on Child Restraint Systems CRS April 11th, 2012 Informal document GRSP
A 4.25 kg block of wood has a kinetic coefficient of friction of and a static of between it and the level floor. 0. Calculate the kinetic friction.
Proposal of the Informal Working Group on Head Restraints GTR Phase 2 JAPAN Informal document No. GRSP (43rd GRSP, May 2008, agenda item.
Evaluation of ES-2 by the Occupant Safety Research Partnership of USCAR presented by Annette L. Irwin representing the Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers.
Car Occupant Injuries Caused By Loading From Luggage 35th GRSP, May , 2004 Slide Nr. 1 Eberhard Faerber, BASt, Germany CCIS(UK) & GIDAS(D) Accident.
Meeting Review – GTR #7 Phase II 44 th Session of GRSP December 2008 Informal Document No. GRSP (44th session, December 2008, agenda.
Fatalities and Injuries among Children in Motor Vehicle Crashes in Japan 18 June, 2008 JASIC Japan Automobile Standards Internationalization Center CRS
Japan’s Proposal and Clarification 57th GRSP Informal Group on Child Restraint System 23rd March 2016 JASIC.
Chalmers University of Technology Suggestions for new BioRID certification procedures By Johan Davidsson, Chalmers University of Technology GTR
独立行政法人交通安全環境研究所 National Traffic Safety and Environment Laboratory Feasibility and Repeatability of the Sled Test in AECS-Annex 7 12 th AECS meeting
GRSP December 2015 ECE R129 Amendments N°1 & 2 Informal document: GRSP (58th GRSP, December 2015, agenda item 15 an 19)
GRSP Ad hoc Group on R44 COP
Japan’s Stance for the R129 Phase 2
Transmitted by the expert from CLEPA Informal document GRSP-57-25
Review of GRSP e Proposal for amendments to R44 11/05/17
Regulation 129 CLEPA response to
Free-Fall.
Cart on Ramp Lab.
Motion Graphs Position-Time (also called Distance-Time or Displacement-Time) d t At rest.
M.A. Forero Rueda, M.D. Gilchrist  Forensic Science International 
CHILD OCCUPANT SAFETY WORKING GROUP 18 Jean-Yves LE COZ Chairman
Bundesanstalt für Straßenwesen
45th GRSP Session Status report of Informal Group on CRS
Response to ANEC proposal for Booster phase out in R44
UN-Regulation No. 80 Additional Information to GRSP-62-35
UN Regulation No. 94  or Door locking status at engine running
Status report GRSP IWG FI
CLEPA analysis of belt contact width measurement (ref. GRSP/2018/6)
Graphing Motion Walk Around
UN Regulation No. 95 *  or Door locking status at engine running
Dynamic criteria Biorid
Q-Dummy Behaviours following used types of pulses
Ch. 6 slides.ppt Forces2.ppt.
Informal document GRSP Add.1
Update on Pedestrian Leg Testing
Ministry of Infrastructure and Transport
Standardized Child Passenger Safety Training Program Winter 2004
National Standardized Child Passenger Safety Training Program May 2004
Securing of children in buses and coaches
Summary of Proposed Amendment to gtr 9
Comparing Men’s Soccer Head Impact Characteristics Over a Three Year Time Period Karlie Ennis.
Submitted by the expert from Consumers International
National Standardized Child Passenger Safety Training Program May 2004
CRS Resolution 240 – Request by ECE/GRSP for essential parameters of a CRS side impact test method As an answer to the request (ref SC12 N 608) by.
Japan Opinion for TF-BTA Proposals
Today’s Agenda…8/17  Quiz Review Marble Race Lab - #3
Work Ms. Jeffrey- Physics.
Presentation transcript:

GRSP Inf. Group on Child Restraint Systems CRS-31-08 Informal document GRSP-51-38 (51st GRSP, 21 – 25 May 2012, agenda item 20) GRSP Inf. Group on Child Restraint Systems CRS-31-08 April 11th , 2012 Comparison of CRS Side Impact Test Results Using by Acceleration Type Sled and Deceleration type Sled JASIC / Japan I will present the “Comparison of CRS Side Impact Test Results Using by Acceleration Type Sled and Deceleration type Sled”.

Background & Purpose NTSEL (type approval test department in Japan) has the acceleration type sled test system. So it is necessary to compare the CRS side impact sled test results between tested by deceleration type sled system and tested by acceleration type sled test system. We done CRS side impact sled tests by acceleration type sled test system and confirm to compare the test severity between deceleration sled and acceleration sled. The back ground of this research is that the NTSEL, which is the type approval test department in Japan, has the acceleration type sled system, and does not have the deceleration type sled system. So we need to confirm that we can do the CRS side impact sled test by acceleration type sled test system. We done CRS side impact sled tests by acceleration type sled test system and confirm to compare the test severity between deceleration sled and acceleration sled.

Concept of CRS Side Impact Test Using by Acceleration Type Sled System Next speak to Concept of CRS Side Impact Test Using by Acceleration Type Sled System

Parameters of New Side Impact Test Relative velocity between door and sled Door intrusion This shows the parameters of side impact test. The relative velocity between sled and door, and door intrusion are the parameters.

Photos before sled tests This shows the photos of sled test initial conditions. Seat is set on sled on sled and therefore seat can be easily moved.

Video This shows the video of test.

Test Concept Relative velocity Intrusion This shows the velocity and intrusion time histories. Time of 0ms is defined when the door is at the end of the seat, defined in regulation. The door velocity is maximum before time is 0ms, and the door velocity keep almost constant till the seat velocity catches up with the door. The seat velocity start increasing almost at time is 0ms. Relative velocity between the door and seat is in corridor. The intrusion is the same with relative displacement of door and seat. And the intrusion is almost 250mm and satisfy the regulation. In this test concept, door moved with sled and seat moved on sled on sled.

Comparison of Test Results Using by Acceleration Type Sled System and Deceleration Type Sled System Next speak about the comparison test results.

Tested CRS CRS A is Group I TT CRS and CRS B is Group I SL CRS CRS A This shows tested CRS. We tested 2 types of CRSs. Both CRSs were the Group I CRS. CRS A is TT and CRS B is SL. CRS A is Group I TT CRS and CRS B is Group I SL CRS

Maximum injury Measures (CRS A) Date from TUB and Dorel This is the comparison of maximum injury measures about CRS A. As for the CRS A, we get the data from TUB and Dorel. Test labs were 5 places, Britax, TUB, IDIADA, Dorel and NTSEL.

Maximum Injury Measures (CRS A) Date from TUB and Dorel This shows the deviation to mean and coefficient of variation. As for the head injury measures, coefficient of variation are less than 5%. And deviation to mean are less than 10%. So as for the maximum head injury measures, the test results were almost similar. As for the head injury measures, the test results were almost similar

Video of Side Impact Test (CRS A) Deceleration Sled Acceleration Sled This shows the test videos of CRS A tests used by deceleration sled and acceleration sled. Data was got from Dorel Date from Dorel

Time Histories (CRS A) Relative velocity Date from Dorel This shows the relative velocity time histories.

Time Histories (CRS A) Head acceleration Date from Dorel This shows the head resultant acceleration time histories. Though the timing of start rising of head resultant acceleration was different, the shape and maximum head resultant accelerations were similar. As for the head acceleration, time histories were almost similar

Time Histories (CRS A) Date from Dorel Chest acceleration Pelvis acceleration Neck Upper Force Neck Upper Moment This shows chest and pelvis acceleration ,neck force and neck moment.

Time Histories (CRS A) Date from Dorel Head acceleration (Dorel data moves 5ms) This shows the time history that the time changed. The shape of chest injury measures were almost same. As for the head acceleration, time histories were almost similar

Time Histories (CRS A) Date from Dorel Dorel data moves 5ms Chest acceleration Pelvis acceleration Neck Upper Force Neck Upper Moment

Maximum Injury Measures (CRS B) Date from Dorel This is the comparison of maximum injury measures about CRS B. As for the CRS B, we get the data from Dorel. Test labs were 2 places,, Dorel and NTSEL. Date from Dorel

Maximum Injury Measures (CRS B) This shows the deviation to mean and coefficient of variation. As for the head injury measures, coefficient of variation are less than 5%. So as for the maximum head injury measures, the test results were almost similar. As for the head injury measures, the test results were almost similar Date from Dorel

Video of Side Impact Test (CRS B) Deceleration Sled Acceleration Sled This shows the test videos of CRS B tests used by deceleration sled and acceleration sled. Data was got from Dorel Date from Dorel

Time Histories (CRS B) Relative velocity Date from Dorel

Time Histories (CRS B) Head acceleration Date from Dorel This shows the head resultant acceleration time histories. The shape and maximum head resultant accelerations were similar. As for the head acceleration, time histories were almost similar

Time Histories (CRS B) Date from Dorel Chest acceleration Pelvis acceleration 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 Time (ms) Acceleration (G) NTSEL Dorel 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 Time (ms) Acceleration (G) NTSEL Dorel Neck Upper Force Neck Upper Moment 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 Time (ms) Force (N) NTSEL Dorel -6 -4 -2 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 Time (ms) Moment (N m) NTSEL Dorel This shows chest and pelvis acceleration ,neck force and neck moment. The shapes were similar.

Conclusion As for the head injury measures, the results used by acceleration sled and deceleration sled were almost similar. Comparison of Dorel data and NTSEL data, time histories were almost similar. Severity of the CRS side impact test used by deceleration sled and acceleration sled are similar.