Provisional Agenda for 1st meeting - Dashboard - UNECE Wiki



Minutes meeting for 52th meeting of the Informal Group on

Child Restraint System

|Date: |Start |June 18th |9:30 |

| |End |June 18th |5:00 PM |

Place:

CLEPA offices

Boulevard Brand Whitlock 87/B1

1200 BRUSSELS

Tel. : +32 2 743 91 31

Techsec@clepa.be

clepa.eu

1. Welcome and Roll call (CRS-52-04e)

2. Adoption of the agenda (CRS-52-01e)

3. Validation of the minutes of the last meeting (CRS-51-11e).

Hans AMMERLAAN (RDW) objected to the “decision” noted in the last meeting minutes regarding the DE line. Hans AMMERLAAN explained the process from the 12th meeting, where the concerns with dummies escaping from shield systems up to 105 cm was discussed. This DE line was taken on-board in R129.

No decision was taken to remove the DE line. Dinos VISVIKIS (CYBEX) explained that the rebound of the dummies, especially the Q10 is not realistic, and no field data exist to show that rebound injuries occur. Hans AMMERLAAN opposed that lack of field data is no guarantee for safety, and from a point of precaution, Hans AMMERLAAN does not like the DE line to be removed.

Meeting minutes corrected to reflect that it is accepted that the topic of the DE line will be studied. (CRS-51-11e rev 2)

4. Status Report from the May session of GRSP (GRSP-57-22e) from Pierre CASTAING (UTAC-CERAM).

In the presentation to the GRSP (57eme session) Pierre CASTAING show the concrete achievements so for : i-Size available up to 105 cm; Side impact protection; “Universal” plug and play approach and no forward facing transport bellow 15 months of child age.

Shortcomings phase I are:

• Flexibility for infant carrier systems;

• Certain measures still have more potential for improvement (frontal impact pulse);

• Consideration of shields as “integral eCRS” (not authorised in phase I).

For phase II, main problems are:

• Address enhanced safety for children in cars on boosters cushions without a backrest;

• Geometric definition of the test fixture for booster seats with an integrated backrest;

• Centre of eCRS different from centre of car seat;

• Q6 & Q10 dummies reliability for testing

• Complexity of information to users in vehicle handbook.

Pierre CASTAING came back on the 56th GRSP session where European Commission & Germany have proposed different strategies for current and future phases. After the 56th GRSP session, the IWG CRS decision (taken during the 50th session) was to:

• Agree to study the feasibility of reducing the width of the F4 gabarit to 440 mm or modification of conditions (energy, percentile, shoulder breadth…);

• The extreme fall back solution should be to increase gradually the gabarit width between 440 mm and 520 mm. Dead line for decision on the feasibility is 1st week of September 2015.

Decision about the booster cushion is to keep this category for the time being in ECE R44, and to modify the ECE R44 to prohibit the use of booster cushion for children under 125 cm.

The IWG has asked for the consent of GRSP to go in this direction, the IWG proposed to GRSP to prepare four formal documents for the December GRSP session:

• ECE R129 phase I amendments

• ECE R129 phase 2 amendment limited to booster seats ≤ 135 cm

• ECE R16 amendment

• ECE R44 amendment for booster cushion (limit the use for children ≥ 125 cm).

IWG CRS sought consent from WP29 for a one year extension of his mandate until end of 2016.

5. Feedback from CLEPA on feasibility of booster seat width of 440 mm

1. Side impact protection in non-integral CRS – First feedback on 440 mm from François RENAUDIN / DOREL (CRS-52-02e) on behalf of CLEPA.

In the presentation, François RENAUDIN comes back on the background and context ISO booster volume developed in close collaboration between OICA & CLEPA.

CLEPA interpretation of EC presentation (CRS-50-04e):

• CRS manufacturers are being asked to reduce width of booster assessment volume,

• Car manufacturer are being asked to align seat belt and Isofix anchorages,

This proposal will limit the use of eCRS to a stature of 135cm whereas several European members States require child seat use up to a stature of 150 cm.

For CLEPA the head protection is the priority but booster seats must provide protection also to other body regions.

François RENAUDIN shows the overview of CLEPA investigations for Q3, Q6 & Q10 with different booster width (440 mm & 520 mm) in R129 and consumer tests (Dynamic & Simulation). A matrix of the conducted tests is shown below.

[pic]

Differences between the R129 side impact & the consumer side impact test are described: angle of test, door padding, door dimension, intrusion speed.

The overall summary is that:

- the R129 performance thresholds can be met with 440 mm with Q3 & Q6 but not with Q10 (head not contained);

- reducing the width of CRS leads to significant performance degradation in non-regulated body regions;

- acceptable consumer test performance cannot be achieved with 440mm for all dummy sizes

- CRS manufacturers may be reluctant to bring products to the market with such a risk & this may limit the introduction and /or penetration of i-Size booster seats.

CLEPA proposed the following concept to circumnavigate the dilemma.

The proposal is to adjust the requirements for the internal breadth dimensions in a gradual way using the 95th percentile breadth dimensions until a stature of 125 cm and progressively decreasing to the 50th percentile breadth dimensions for a stature of 150 cm, as shown in the following graph:

[pic]

CLEPA: 2nd proposal.

The F4 gabarit depth could be changed in order to offer more comfort for older children and where more lateral protection is needed. The concept is to align F4 fixture depth with F2X.

According to Hans AMMERLAAN (RDW), the Q10 dummy on a booster cushion needs to be protected in side impact by the vehicle, and the limits for Q10 recommended by the EEVC for frontal impact are not to be used for side impact in the R129 for the time being. Discussion in the group focussed on the EEVC working group; Philippe BEILLAS, member of the EEVC WG stated that R129 and the Q10 side impact performance was taken on board as a task in the EEVC WG.

Philippe BEILLAS: In the consumer rating the chest acceleration is taken on-board. Phillippe questions the suitability of the chest acceleration for crash impact testing, based on EEVC work. Philippe asked CLEPA if Chest deflections were measured during the tests shown in previous presentation (CRS-52-02e)

CLEPA answered that unfortunately not all of our labs were capable of measuring the Chest deflection. Additionally Philippe advises to look at the spread of the results.

Question from Pierre CASTAING: what’s EEVC’s opinion on chest acceleration?

Answer from Philippe BEILLAS: Chest acceleration is not a good parameter to compare test results obtained at similar speeds. The chest acceleration is a good measure parameter if you want to get an idea about the severity of an accident. You will find a correlation between impact speeds and chest acceleration values in frontal impact. However, when focusing on one speed only, there is a spread between the data values of the cloud of results.

An intersection at one single speed (x-axis) of cloud of results, shows no correlation anymore.

Question from Pierre CASTAING: Can CLEPA include in the table describing breadth requirements for 135 cm and 150 cm size the Q6 & Q10 dimensions? The table of the CLEPA presentation is adjusted in the meeting (CRS-52-02e V2):

[pic]

Comment from Ansgar POTT (HYUNDAI) for OICA:

OICA likes the idea to have just one global i-Size definition (from new-born to 125/135/150) which will reduce the confusion for customers. A concept could be found to allow more space. The main problem is misuse. Ansgar asked consumer organisations if they can adjust their rating, so that a distinction could be made for R129 seats. Consumer organisation could create a new protocol for i-Size seat considering that i-Size products would enable customers to simply combine the CRS with the vehicle and ensure that mid-size family cars will fit 3 eCRS in the second row. Ronald VROMAN (ANEC) will forward the question to ETC board.

2. Compatibility check (CLEPA) from Okke VAN MOURIK (HTS Besafe) (CRS-52-03e)

The European commission has suggested modifying the F4 box. Besafe has checked 49 cars to see how this box with its normal width (520 mm) and with a reduced width (440 mm) is fitting in cars.

✓ 5 out of 49 cars fit 3 reduced version of the RF4 box installed with ISOFIX (some cars have only 2 Isofix seating positions),

✓ 19 out of 49 cars fit 3 reduced version of the TF4 box with belt installation only,

✓ 49 out of 49 cars fit 2 complete TF4 boxes with ISOFIX installation.

In conclusion, almost no cars (5 out of 49) give the possibility to install 3 reduced boxes, using the Isofix installation. Some cars (19 out of 49) can give the possibility to position 3 reduced boxes using belt installation only.

The proposed F4 fixture (520 mm. width) offers a compatibility volume. It fits in all cars (2 seats next to each other).

The study shows that potentially the reduced fixture could allow the installation of 3 boosters seats with ISOFIX if implemented.

Conclusions for further approach in R129 phase II: reduced width from 520 mm to 440mm leads to less usable space to establish side impact protection in a booster seat, leading to reduced side impact performance. Only some very large cars accept 3 isofix positions (i-size) on the rear bench.

For Ansgar POTT (HYUNDAI), the last CLEPA presentation is totally in line with the OICA presentation (CRS-50-05e). Mid-size and large family cars could be equipped with 3 ISOFIX in a row.

Pierre CASTAING (UTAC – CERAM) reminds that ISOFIX connectors in i-size booster seats must be stowable. He does not want to put more restriction forward for the vehicle. If alignment is needed for belts and ISOFIX anchors, it will be driven by EuroNCAP and not by regulation.

François RENAUDIN (DOREL) objected that consumer will have difficulty to understand that they will have to stow isofix from their booster to fit in i-Size seating position.

Philippe BEILLAS (IFSTTAR) asked if the group realized that the protection of the younger children (3/4/5 years old) in side impact will be limited by the internal dimensions requirement for the older.

François RENAUDIN proposed that CLEPA will come back next meeting with test results showing how interior dimensions modification could improve test results.

In addition, Pierre CASTAING (UTAC – CERAM) suggests changing the dummy application Table 7, (7.1.3.6.), so that for a CRS with a size range up to 135cm stature the Q6 will be used. (It was 125cm). The Q10 dummy will be used for an eCRS with a declared size range above 135cm.

Size range indication |≤ 60 |60 < x ≤ 75 |75 < x ≤ 87 |87 < x ≤ 105 |105 < x ≤ 135 |> 135 | |Dummy |Q0 |Q1 |Q1.5 |Q3 |Q6 |Q10 | |

To facilitate the width reduction of the F4 fixture, Pierre CASTAING proposed two modifications:

1 – Enlarge the size range of the Q6 from 125 cm to 135 cm

2 – Adjust the internal dimension requirement from 95% to less, e.g. 50% from a certain stature (e.g. 125 cm).

Internal dimension table (annex 18 of ECE R129) could be adjusted for shoulder and hip breadth. CLEPA is asked to propose a set of values to replace the 95% values.

[pic]

6. Decision on Phase 2 content

Previous discussions (Selection criteria for the dummy according to the range in table 7 in chapter 7.1.3.6; and in annex 18 to be modified later) are taken in account in the draft ECE R129 under CRS-52-05e

7. Abdominal pressure twin sensors CRS-52-06e by Philippe BEILLAS.

Since 2014 – 2015, TRANSPOLIS are in charge of development of production and certification facilities of APTS 50 mm (for Q3, Q6 & Q10) and for APTS 30 mm (for Q1.5). There is still work on integration (discussions ongoing with Humanetics). Several tests were performed on several Q10 blocks and results are quite encouraging. Same tests to plan with other abdomen sizes. 40 mm diameters APTS are needed for intermediated size fir Q3 & Q6. APTS are available for sled testing for user that would be interested.

8. Q10 abdominal /Dorel CRS-52-07e

Based on work on Q6 dummy, a silicone insert is made for Q10 at DOREL. Test conditions were the same as for Q6: R129 frontal impact, abdomen sensors are placed in dummy, submarining checked with high speed camera. Only two variations of dummy was tested (plastic insert from Humanetics & Silicone insert form DOREL). When the normal Q10 is installed on the bench, there is no effort on the abdomen & no submarining but with silicone insert in, there is submarining and abdominal pressure was up to 2.53 bars. Two boosters seats were tested and we can make a difference now (when silicone insert is placed) between low price product & high price product. In conclusion, there is no need to change the R129 pulse and R129 test bench. An adapted insert can change the kinematics of the dummies during the crash in order to have submarining & abdominal pressure.

Pierre CASTAING (UTAC – CERAM): Now that we have the solution to solve the submarining of the dummy, thus we can start to apply the abdominal pressure. Pierre CASTAING proposes to accept the values for abdominal pressure. The upper neck tension, neck moment, chest acceleration and chest compression need a review and the input from EEVC and TRL before being put into the regulation.

Pierre CASTAING (UTAC – CERAM): What can we do to assess the position of the belt over the shoulder?

Philippe LESIRE (LAB): split the question in two aspects; comfort & dynamic aspects. Comfort is linked to belts going up into the chin area & belts slipping of the shoulder. Erik SALTERS (DOREL): this is for comfort quite well covered in the current measurement device.

The lowest belt position is needed for smallest child, and should be low enough to ensure that the belt doesn’t cut the chin, when the best possible belt slot height position is chosen. For the largest child, the belt slot should be able to be positioned high enough, so that the belt does not slide of the shoulder, or dives down (to low) behind the shoulder.

Pierre CASTAING: we need to have some test methodology like UMTRI procedure (CRS-52-08e)

UMTRI booster belt fit:

[pic]

Question from Pierre CASTAING: can CLEPA discuss with Hans AMMERLAAN (RDW) about the DE limit.

9. Clarification of the Compatibility between the Vehicles and the CRSs: Japan Presentation CRS-52-09e from Yoshinori TANAKA (NTSEL).

Japan needs clarification of the compatibility between ISOFIX positions or i-Size seating positions of the vehicles and Universal ISOIFX CRSs or Semi-Universal ISOFIX CRSs under the current situation. They also need clarification of the compatibility between ISOFIX positions or i-Size seating positions or Universal booster seating positions of the vehicles and lateral facing i-Size CRSs or universal booster seats under consideration. There are some concerns about i-Size seating position or i-Size CRS and concerns about the proposal for lateral facing i-Size CRS.

The CRS manufacturers are obligated to supply information to consumers that i-Size CRSs are suitable for fixing into the ISOFIX positions of the cars in the R129.

If the new i-size fixtures are added: how to deal with the differences between the already checked fixture’s sizes and the revised ones? (Possibility to cause confusions to consumers).

Is the lateral facing i-size (?) CRS able to be installed into i-size seating position of the front passenger seat? The criteria are necessary for evaluating the head position during the lateral impact test. If “i-size compatible” or other is newly created, it needs a clear definition.

Pierre CASTAING (UTAC – CERAM) : it is clear that lateral facing is not i-Size, but R129 vehicle specific. Lateral facing is possible under i-Size only up to 440 mm wide. Already discussed partly in GRSP meeting. Peter BROERTJES (European Commission) and OICA agrees. OICA mentions that the L1 & L2 gabarit are in ECE R16, so it there is a needs to have a modification of R16 based on CLEPA proposal to GRSP in May 2015 session to modify gabarit L1 & L2.

However Dinos VISVIKIS (CYBEX) explains that we have to keep in mind that parents are confronted with a premature baby, they need to be able to find a CRS that’s fits their car. It should fit, meaning “universal”, this may then be placed under ECE R44.

Next point of the NTSEL presentation is the addition of F4 gabarit. It may be so that the current produced i-Size vehicles will also fit the additional space required by the F4 box, compared to the R2 and F2x for which they are approved.

10. To do

Pierre CASTAING (UTAC – CERAM): asks for OK for the suppression of the Q10 for booster seat and a gradual decrease of the percentiles. CLEPA will present the associated benefits.

Pierre CASTAING asks OICA to if they allow accept the principle that the group to proposes amendment on R16 on L1 & L2 gabarits.

11. Next meetings

1. 53th meeting will be held in London – SMMT offices (71 Great Peter St) – September, the 2nd and start at 9.30 AM until 5.00 PM

2. 54th meeting will be held in Brussels – European Commission offices – October, the 27th and start at 9.30 AM until 5.00 PM

12. A.O.B.

PLEASE CONFIRM YOUR ATTENDANCE before end of 28th of August

To Yoann.brunetiere@dorel.eu and to p.davis@smmt.co.uk

................
................

In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.

Google Online Preview   Download