Global Technical Regulation No. 9

Name:Global Technical Regulation No. 9
Description:Pedestrian Safety.
Official Title:Pedestrian Safety.
Country:ECE - United Nations
Date of Issue:2008-11-12
Amendment Level:Amendment 1 of February 22, 2011.
Number of Pages:77
Vehicle Types:Bus, Car, Heavy Truck, Light Truck
Subject Categories:Pedestrian Protection
Available on InterRegs.NET

Our online subscription service, offering immediate access to our extensive library of global vehicle regulations, standards and legislation. A fully searchable, accurate, user-friendly resource for consolidated regulations that are updated quickly and frequently.

Tell me more | Already a subscriber

Available on SelectRegs.com

Our fast and easy means of purchasing up-to-date global vehicle and component standards and regulations on a pay-as-you-go basis. Pay securely by credit card and your documents are delivered directly and immediately to your computer as PDF files.

Tell me more | Go straight to site

Keywords:

inf, test, impactor, vehicle, headform, impact, vehicles, legform, pedestrian, bonnet, bumper, gtr, child, head, adult, lower, group, requirements, reference, line, paragraph, area, front, injuries, upper, figure, ihra, contact, informal, leg, knee, meeting, tests, edge, mass, centre, time, certification, point, hic, protection, data, rear, tolerance, defined, rev, plane, structure, foam, injury

Text Extract:

All InterRegs documents are formatted as PDF files and contain the full text, tables, diagrams and illustrations of the original as issued by the national government authority. We do not re-word, summarise, cut or interpret the regulatory documents. They are consolidated, published in English, and updated on a regular basis. The following text extract indicates the scope of the document, but does not represent the actual PDF content.

ECE/TRANS/180/Add.9/Amend.1
February 22, 2011
GLOBAL REGISTRY
Created on November 18, 2004, Pursuant to Article 6 of the
AGREEMENT CONCERNING THE ESTABLISHING OF GLOBAL TECHNICAL
REGULATIONS FOR WHEELED VEHICLES, EQUIPMENT AND PARTS WHICH
CAN BE FITTED AND/OR BE USED ON WHEELED VEHICLES
(ECE/TRANS/132 and Corr.1)
DONE AT GENEVA ON JUNE 25, 1998
Addendum:
GLOBAL TECHNICAL REGULATION NO. 09
PEDESTRIAN SAFETY
(ESTABLISHED IN THE GLOBAL REGISTRY ON NOVEMBER 12, 2009)
Incorporating:
Corrigendum 1
dated March 5, 2010
Corrigendum 2
dated February 22, 2011
Amendment 1
dated February 22, 2011

7.
Test Procedure
7.1.
Legform to bumper test procedures
7.2.
Headform test procedures
7.3.
Child headform test procedure
7.4.
Adult headform test procedure
8.
Certification of impactors
8.1.
Lower legform impactor certification
8.2.
Upper legform impactor certification
8.3.
Child and adult headform impactors certification

(b)
Crash Speeds
6. Crash speeds between vehicles and pedestrians were collected from pedestrian
accident data. The cumulative frequency of the crash speeds shows that a crash speed
of up to 40km/h can cover more than 75% of total pedestrian injuries (AIS 1+) in all
regions.
(c)
Target Population for this gtr
7. The IHRA injury data indicate the injury distribution by body regions. Fatal and serious
head injuries (AIS2+) of children and adults as well as AIS2+ adult leg injuries were
extracted from the IHRA data base for clearly identified injury causing parts on the
vehicle and on the road (INF GR/PS/131 and 169). It was found that bonnet/wing
contacts caused 41% of child head injuries of AIS2+ and 19% of the adult AIS2+ head
injuries. Bumper contacts lead to 64% of adult AIS2+ leg injuries. The cumulative
frequency curves versus vehicle impact speed for these injuries and their respective
injury causing parts show that 58% of the child head AIS2+ injuries are addressed to a
vehicle impact speed up to 40km/h, 40% to adult head AIS2+ injuries and 50% of the
adult leg AIS2+ injuries respectively. Based on these figures of injuries by injury source
and vehicle contact area, the target population of the above-mentioned AIS2+ injuries for
this proposed gtr is 24% of child pedestrian head injuries, 8% of adult pedestrian head
injuries, and 32% of adult leg injuries.
8. Each of these body regions, i.e. head of child/adult and adult leg, covers more than 30%
of total fatal and severe injuries (INF GR/PS/3). This gtr focuses on protecting these
body regions.
9. The major source of child head injuries is the top surface of the bonnet/wing, while adult
head injuries result from impacts to the top surface of bonnet/wing and windscreen area.
For adult leg injuries, the major source is the front bumper of vehicles.
(d)
Applicability to Motor Vehicle Categories
10. The maximum benefit from making vehicles pedestrian friendly would occur if all types of
vehicles comply with these technical provisions, but it is recognized that their application
to heavier vehicles (large trucks and buses) as well as to very small and light vehicles
could be of limited value and may not be technically appropriate in their present form.
The tests proposed in this gtr have been developed on the basis of current light vehicles,
taking into account the pedestrian kinematics when impacted by such vehicles. For this
reason, the scope of application is limited to passenger cars, sport utility vehicles (SUV),
light trucks and other light commercial vehicles. Since these vehicle categories represent
the vast majority of vehicles currently in use, the proposed measures will have the widest
practicable effect in reducing pedestrian injuries.

16. After several discussions on this issue the group decided not to include these kinds of
tests into the gtr at this stage for the following reasons:
(i)
(ii)
(iii)
The group recognized that the A-pillars, windscreen roof and lower frame have to
be very stiff vehicle parts due to their functional requirements. As an example in
the lower windscreen area, the required deformation space to meet a head impact
requirement is restricted by the instrument panel. Some components that are
required to meet governmental safety standards, such as defrost/demist etc.,
make it impossible to lower the dashboard significantly. In addition, the structural
components of the dashboard represent important load paths in front or side
crashes. On the other hand, the entire windscreen frame would need to be
softened extremely to pass any HIC (Head Injury Criterion) requirement. This
strongly contradicts roll over requirements and other existing legal and consumer
demands (see INF GR/PS/059 and INF GR/PS/035). In addition the group
received detailed data showing that extremely high HIC measurements are
frequently obtained in these difficult areas (see INF GR/PS/072, 094, 102
and 103) and agreed that there are no technical design solutions or
countermeasures available so far to drastically reduce HIC levels.
The windscreen glass itself does not produce severe injuries and therefore the
amount of saved casualties will be very low. The effectiveness of testing the
windscreen inner part is seen as very questionable.
In addition, it was noted that vehicle manufacturers believed that there are
problems related to scatter of HIC when performing tests in the windscreen and
that the reasons for the scatter are not yet fully understood (see INF GR/PS/134,
163 and 164).
17. However, some delegates expressed interest in having domestic regulations that apply
head protection requirements to the windscreen area. The informal group did not believe
the gtr would foreclose any jurisdiction from applying head protection requirements to the
windscreen area by way of domestic regulations.
(b)
Overview
18. This gtr consists of two sets of performance criteria applying to: (a) the bonnet top and
wings; and (b) the front bumper. Test procedures have been developed for each region
using sub-system impacts for adult and child head protection and adult leg protection.
19. The head impact requirements will ensure that bonnet tops and wings will provide head
protection when struck by a pedestrian. The bonnet top and wings would be impacted
with a child headform and an adult headform at 35km/h. The HIC must not exceed 1,000
over one half of a child headform test area and must not exceed 1,000 over two thirds of
a combined child and adult headform test areas. The HIC for the remaining areas must
not exceed 1,700 for both headforms.

29. TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2005/3 was proposed at the thirty-seventh session of GRSP and
was a revised draft gtr including the preamble, of the informal group (INF GR/PS/117).
30. The group had held the following meetings:
(a)
(b)
(c)
(d)
(e)
(f)
(g)
(h)
(i)
(j)
September 4-5, 2002, Paris, France
December10, 2002, Geneva, Switzerland
January 15-16, 2003, Santa Oliva, Spain
May 15-16, 2003, Tokyo, Japan
September 10-12, 2003, Ottawa, Canada
February 24-26, 2004, Paris, France
September 28-30, 2004, Paris, France
July 11-13, 2005, Brussels, Belgium
December 5-6, 2005, Geneva, Switzerland
January 16-19, 2006, Washington DC, USA
31. The meetings were attended by representatives of:
32. Canada, France, Germany, European Community (EC), Italy, Japan, Korea, the
Netherlands, Spain, Turkey, the United States of America (USA), Consumers
International (CI), the European Enhanced Vehicle-safety Committee (EEVC) , the
European Association of Automotive Suppliers (CLEPA) and the International
Organization of Motor Vehicle Manufacturers (OICA).
33. The meetings were chaired by Mr. Mizuno (Japan) and Mr. Friedel/Mr. Cesari (EC), while
the secretariat was provided by Mr. Van der Plas (OICA).

39. The United States research programmes have addressed how vehicles could be
modified to reduce the severity of head and leg impacts. The current US pedestrian
protection research programme supports the IHRA objectives. Current activities include
(1) pedestrian field data analysis to develop test conditions, (2) evaluation of pedestrian
head and leg test tools, (3) experimental impact testing of vehicle structures to assess
aggressivity, (4) pedestrian case reconstructions using a combination of field data,
computer simulation, and testing to better understand injury mechanisms, (5) computer
model development using available biomechanical literature, and (6) completion of other
IHRA Pedestrian Safety Working Group action items.
40. The IHRA Pedestrian Safety working group has conducted in-depth accident studies
based on pedestrian accident data collected from the member countries. In addition, this
group carefully studied the front shape of passenger vehicles including SUVs, and used
best available computer simulation models to study the effective head mass, adult and
child head impacting speed during the impact with vehicles and the impact angles.
41. Based on these research results, the IHRA group developed test procedures and test
devices for adult and child head protection and for adult leg protection.
42. The International Organization for Standardization (ISO) created the pedestrian
protection working group (ISO/TC22/SC10/WG2) in 1987 to develop test methods for the
reduction of serious injuries and fatalities for pedestrian to car accidents. The mandate
for ISO/WG2 was to produce test methods, covering crash speeds up to 40km/h, which
will contribute to make cars pedestrian friendly. Since then, the WG2 has developed
pedestrian test procedures and has described the necessary test tools. The study results
were fully used in the IHRA/PS group when IHRA/PS developed the adult and child
impactors.
43. The ISO standards and draft standards are:
(a)
(b)
(c)
ISO 11096 2002 Road vehicles − Pedestrian protection − Impact test method for
pedestrian thigh, leg and knee,
ISO/DIS 14513 2006 Road vehicles − Pedestrian protection − Head impact test
method,
ISO 16850 2007 Road vehicles − Pedestrian protection − Child head impact test
method.

(b)
Applicability
49. The application of the requirements of this gtr refers, to the extent possible, to the
revised vehicle classification and definitions outlined in the 1998 Global Agreement
Special Resolution No. 1 (S.R.1) concerning the common definitions of vehicle
categories, masses and dimensions.
50. Difficulties, due to differing existing regulations and divergent vehicle fleets, were
encountered in determining which vehicles would be included in the scope. The
Japanese regulation applies to passenger cars for up to nine occupants and commercial
vehicles up to a GVM of 2,500kg. The IHRA recommends tests and procedures for
passenger vehicles of GVM 2,500kg or less. The European Union (EU) Directive applies
to M vehicles up to 2,500kg and N vehicles up to 2,500kg, which are derived from M .
The ISO recommendations are for M and N vehicles that have a GVM of 3,500kg or
less. In addition, some countries, taking into account their current fleet composition,
wanted to ensure that larger vehicles, such as light trucks and sport utility vehicles with a
GVM of 4,500kg or less, were not excluded.
51. The group originally reviewed in detail the IHRA recommendation in detail to take into
account the shape of the front of the vehicle as an important parameter when discussing
the types of pedestrian injuries to be mitigated. IHRA specifies three groups of vehicle
shape: sedan, SUV, and 1-box. For the adult and child head impacts, IHRA foresees
different impact test speeds and different impact angles. The Japanese legislation is
based on the IHRA recommended method. The EU requirements, on the contrary, do not
differentiate between the various test speeds and impact angles.
52. The group compared these various considerations and, on the basis of simulations
(INF GR/PS/129), concluded that the EU requirements in effect are more severe than the
Japanese proposals. For safety reasons, the group therefore uses the EU approach, not
taking into account the shape of the vehicle front in defining the requirements.
Furthermore, the group also determined that the IHRA recommendations would be
difficult to put in place in the context of a regulatory and certification approach.
53. There was considerable discussion over the mass of vehicles to which this gtr should
apply. Using the categories described in S.R.1, several options were examined. Some
delegates wanted to limit application of the gtr to vehicles in Category 1-1 with a vehicle
mass of less than 2,500kg GVM. Other delegates did not agree with a 2,500kg limit on
GVM, believing that since the front-end structure of vehicles with a mass up to 4,500kg
GVM is usually similar to that of lighter vehicles, the application of the gtr should include
the heavier vehicles. In addition, some delegates sought to limit application of the gtr to
vehicles of a GVM of more than 500kg, while other delegates expressed concern about
having a lower mass limit, believing that a particular jurisdiction might determine there is
a need to apply the gtr requirements in that jurisdiction to vehicles with a GVM of less
than 500kg. There was a suggestion that the gtr should also apply to vehicles in
Category 2 that had the "same" general structure and shape forward of the A-pillars as
vehicles in Category 1-1. However, some were concerned that it would be unfeasible to
define objectively what was meant by "same".

58. Furthermore, during the development phase of this gtr, the main focus was on vehicles
of a GVM of 2,500kg or less, that are also addressed in all existing legislation. The later
extension to other vehicles however needs to recognise that some additional lead-time
may be necessary, because many current vehicles, exempted from existing national or
regional requirements, are now included. In addition, while the test procedures and
requirements of this gtr were based on requirements originally developed for "classical"
(sedan type) passenger cars, the gtr now also covers vehicles with specific shapes or
features (High Front Vehicles, special purpose vehicles, etc.), for which it is recognised
that special consideration may be needed.
(c)
Implementation Generally
59. The informal group considers all tests in this proposed gtr to be technically feasible and
able to evaluate objectively the ability of vehicle bonnets and bumpers to absorb energy
more efficiently. However, pedestrian accident crash characteristics and vehicle baseline
performance may differ regionally. It will be the decision of each jurisdiction to determine
whether the benefits achieved by requiring these tests justify the costs. Based on this
determination, a jurisdiction can choose to limit the application in its own regulation to
specific vehicle categories, specific tests, and/or it may decide to phase in the
regulations over time.
(d)
Points Tested
60. The informal group considered whether to specify both the number of test points and the
minimum spacing of such test points. On consideration, the group determined that the
specification of such points did not have a place within this proposed gtr for the following
reasons:
(i)
(ii)
(iii)
For governments that use a self-certification regulatory framework, it was not
considered necessary to mention the number of tests required for testing or their
spacing, as it would be incumbent on vehicle manufacturers to ensure that
vehicles comply with all the impact zone requirements defined within this proposed
gtr when tested by the regulating authority.
For type approval, the number of tests that need to be carried out to satisfy the
relevant authority that vehicles meet the requirements is an issue for that
authority, which may specify the number of tests and the spacing between the test
points.
The mention of a minimum number of tests or a minimum distance apart between
tests could result in manufacturers being burdened with unnecessary tests and/or
authorities being unnecessarily restricted in test programs, as it would be difficult
to set a target that would encompass both the largest and smallest test zones, and
the situation could arise where test zones could be smaller than the minimum
number of tests required that could be fitted into that zone.

(iii)
Upper Legform Impactor to Bonnet Leading Edge Test
66. Several accident studies from some regions comparing modern "streamline" vehicle
fronts registered in or after 1990 and old vehicles from the eighties or seventies indicate
a decrease in AIS 2+ upper leg and pelvis injuries caused by the bonnet leading edge.
The accident studies were performed by the LAB using French data (INF GR/PS/30),
and by the University of Dresden using German GIDAS data (INF GR/PS/92). In
addition, EEVC Working Group 17 (WG17) summarized in their 1998 report that no
serious (AIS 2+) upper leg or pelvis injuries caused by the bonnet leading edge were
found for post-1990 car models impacting a pedestrian at a speed up to 40km/h
(INF GR/PS/187 Rev.1). In contrast, data from the United States of America indicate a
high incidence of above-the-knee injuries due to the prevalence of light trucks and vans
in the United States fleet, and that consideration should be given to evaluating thigh, hip,
and pelvis injuries in future test procedures.
67. Despite the desire to address any potential injuries in the upper leg or pelvic area, the
group was also concerned that there was a serious lack of biofidelity for the existing test
device and the respective test procedure to assess injury caused by the bonnet leading
edge of high profile vehicles. Therefore, the group recommended excluding the upper
legform impactor to bonnet leading edge test at this stage. IHRA/PS is carrying out
further research into an improved impactor and test procedures for this test.
6. PEDESTRIAN HEAD PROTECTION
68. IHRA data show that a major source of child and adult pedestrian head injuries is the top
surface of the bonnet/wing of the striking vehicle. As explained in this section, this gtr
requires the bonnet/wing to perform at levels that decrease the likelihood that head
impact with the bonnet/wing in a 40km/h pedestrian-to-vehicle impact will result in fatal or
serious injury.
69. The bonnet/wing would be impacted with a headform at 35km/h. The bonnet/wing would
be divided into a "child headform test area" and an "adult headform test area". The child
headform test area is the area of the bonnet/wing that is likely to be impacted by the
head of a 6-year-old child in a pedestrian impact. A child headform is used to evaluate
the bonnet/wing in that area. Likewise, the adult headform test area corresponds to the
area of the bonnet/wing that the head of a mid-size adult male pedestrian is likely to
impact. An adult headform is used to test the bonnet/wing in the latter area.

(b)
Head Injury Criterion
74. The majority of pedestrian fatalities in road accidents are caused by head injuries. The
informal group determined that the head protection performance should be based on the
Head Injury Criterion (HIC) , given the ability of HIC to estimate the risk of serious to
fatal head injury in motor vehicle crashes. An HIC value of 1,000 is equivalent to
approximately a 15% risk of AIS 4+ head injury.
75. The gtr specifies that HIC must not exceed 1,000 over one half of the child headform test
area and must not exceed 1,000 over two thirds of the combined child and adult
headform test areas. The HIC for the remaining areas must not exceed 1,700 for both
headforms (The need for "relaxation zones," in which the HIC limit is 1,700, is discussed
in the next section of this preamble).
76. HIC would be calculated within a 15 ms interval. The main reason that a longer interval
was not used was that head impacts to external car structures are very short, occurring
within a few milliseconds of contact. As the pulse itself is so short in time, there is no risk
to lose part of the pulse during the HIC calculation--and no risk of a lower calculated HIC
value−if a 15 ms interval were used rather than a longer interval (INF GR/PS/168).
Accordingly, using either a 15 ms or a 36 ms pulse window will provide the same HIC
value. Moreover, the test is not intended to record more than one impact. A short time
duration avoids the risk that a second impact could be recorded after rebound. A longer
duration for the time interval could result in distortions in the data recorded by the
headform, which may lead to inaccurate HIC values.
HIC =
⎡ 1

⎣ ( t − t )


adt⎥
( t − t )


(d)
Headform
80. A child headform is used to test the bonnet in the child headform test area, and an adult
headform is used in the adult headform test area. The appropriate headform impactor
size and mass, determined based on the characteristics of the human body, are
explained below (INF GR/PS/46, 74 and 93).
(i)
Headform Diameter
81. The diameter of the child headform is 165mm. Due to the fact that the majority of child
pedestrian victims are 5 or 6 years old, this value was determined based on the average
head diameter of a 6-year-old child (by averaging the diameter obtained from the
circumference of the head and the longitudinal and lateral measurements of the head).
82. The diameter of the adult headform is 165mm, which is the same diameter used in the
test procedures of EEVC and ISO. The value was considered to represent the diameter
mainly of the forehead portion of the 50th percentile adult male, rather than the
maximum outer diameter of the head. The average height and weight of all adult
pedestrian victims in the IHRA dataset is about the same as those of the 50th percentile
male.
83. Thus the diameter of both the child and adult headforms is 165mm. Although the
diameter is different from the diameter of actual child and adult human heads, the
diameter and moment of inertia are appropriately designed so that the child and adult
headforms can properly estimate severity of injury to actual child and adult human heads
(see IHRA/PS N231).
84. Testing experience with the headforms show them to be highly repeatable and
reproducible.
(ii)
Headform Mass and Moment of Inertia
85. Computer simulations conducted in the IHRA study show that the effective mass of the
head in an impact with vehicles is identical to the actual mass of the head. Accordingly,
the headform mass was therefore determined as follows:
a. The mass of the child headform is 3.5kg, representing the mass of the head of a
6-year-old child.
b. The mass of the adult headform is 4.5kg, representing the mass of the head of a
50th percentile adult male.

91. In determining test speeds and angles of impact, the informal group considered the
findings of IHRA and the EEVC. IHRA had explored whether various vehicle shapes
influenced the angle at which a pedestrian's head impacted the bonnet top. Computer
simulations were conducted, as part of the IHRA study, by the Japan Automobile
Research Institute (JARI), the United States National Highway Traffic Safety
Administration (NHTSA), and the Road Accident Research Unit of Adelaide University
(RARU). The simulations used a 50th percentile adult male model and a 6-year-old child
model. The distribution of headform impact speeds and angles in various impacts was
obtained by simulating head impacts using three types of walking positions, three types
of vehicle frontal shapes and two types of bonnet stiffness as parameters. The studies
showed that the same headform impact speed could be used for any type of vehicle
frontal shape. Further, the interpretation of the results indicated an average speed of
32km/h, which is 0.8 times the vehicle impact speed of 40km/h. In addition, various
angles for adult and child impact conditions and for the three different shapes were
defined as well.
92. In contrast, EEVC had concluded that one set of angles (50° for the child headform test
and 65° for the adult headform test) for all vehicles is reasonable, simplifying any head
test procedure dramatically. EEVC's decisions concerning head impact angles for child
and adult tests were based on two reports used as working documents: Glaeser K.P.
(1991), "Development of a Head Impact Test Procedure for Pedestrian Protection," BASt
Report under Contract No. ETD/89/7750/M1/28 to the E.C. (INF GR/PS/150); and
Janssen E.G., Nieboer J.J. (1990), "Protection of vulnerable road users in the event of a
collision with a passenger car, Part 1 − computer simulations," TNO
Report No. 75405002/1.
93. The EEVC values were based on post-mortem human subject (PMHS) tests and
simulation results. The PMHS tests indicated a peak of the distribution of adult head
impact angles to be 60°, with all the results falling between 50° and 80°. Simulations
gave a result around 67° for adults, and indicated that vehicle shape had little influence
on the angle of impact. EEVC chose a value of 65°, which was close to the 67° angle
resulting from the simulation and to the average of the PMHS results.
94. For child head impacts, EEVC considered simulations of a small adult female (close in
anthropometry to a 12-year-old child) and of a 6-year-old child. Results of the small adult
female simulations were very close to the results of the simulations for the
50th percentile male adult, while the simulations involving the 6-year-old child suggested
a value around 50°. EEVC picked the value of 50°, believing that the simulations of a
6-year-old child were more relevant than those of a 12-year-old child for child pedestrian
protection.
95. The informal group noted that the one set of angles from EEVC involves a different
(higher) impact speed than that specified by IHRA. The group considered which of the
two approaches of EEVC and IHRA was most stringent and thus offering the most
protection to pedestrians. Working paper INF GR/PS/129 showed, by both numerical
calculation and by simulation, that the set of requirements defined by EEVC is more
severe than the requirements defined by IHRA. The group thus decided to use the EEVC
50° and 65° impact angle for child and adult head testing while maintaining the higher
EEVC impact speed to the bonnet of 35km/h (compared to the IHRA speed of 32km/h).

100. The informal group concurs with the determination of WG17 that the lower leg impactor
test would be inappropriate for vehicles with high bumpers .
101. At the same time, the informal group believes that high bumpers should be more energy
absorbing, and for that reason adopts in this gtr the upper legform test for vehicles with a
lower bumper height of more than 500mm.
102. For vehicles that have a lower bumper height between 425mm and 500mm, the gtr
provides that the vehicle manufacturer can elect to perform either a lower legform test or
an upper legform test. Investigations conducted with vehicles with lower bumper heights
between 400 and 500mm indicate that a large majority of these vehicles have features
for off-road capability. For these off-road vehicles, it is technically not feasible to have a
countermeasure that will enable the vehicle to support the tibia part of the lower legform.
That is, data show (see INF GR/PS/175/Rev.2) that the absence of a lower structure to
support the lower part of the leg, due to the necessary off road capacities, make it very
difficult for these vehicles to meet the proposed lower leg criteria, especially the bending
angle. Therefore, the group recommends to use the upper legform to bumper test as an
optional alternative to the lower legform to bumper test for these vehicles.
103. The group recognizes that excluding vehicles from the lower legform test will affect the
target population of a lower extremity pedestrian regulation, and will reduce the benefits
of the leg protection requirements, particularly with regard to knee injuries.
(iii)
Handling Procedures
104. Delegates to the informal group were concerned about the effects of humidity on the
foam flesh used in the legforms, recognizing that the material can vary significantly in
performance depending on the humidity to which it is exposed. These concerns are
addressed by specific controls in the regulatory text of this gtr regarding the humidity and
other conditions (such as soaking time and a maximum time between removal from the
soaking room and testing) under which the legform tests should be performed.
105. In addition, the group noted that legforms must also be carefully handled, as handling of
the legform can affect variability in the bending angle, shearing displacement, and
acceleration measured by the impactors due to the sensitivity to humidity. The group
believed that handling instructions generally were not necessary to be specified in the gtr
text, because the impactors are usually provided with handling instructions, which are
the normal working tools for test houses and are therefore believed to be sufficient to
cover the normal handling procedures. Nonetheless, the informal group emphasized that
careful and controlled handling procedures, such as those developed by the German
Federal Highway Research Institute BASt (INF GR PS/154/Rev.1), are highly important
to ensure reliable test results.

111. With regard to knee shearing limits, the informal group selected a limit of 6mm, based on
the analysis of PMHS by EEVC WG17 and WG10 that showed that a 6mm shear
displacement corresponds to a 4 kN shear force. The 4 kN shear force in the TRL device
approximates the 3 kN average peak shearing force acting at the knee joint level that
was found associated in the PMHS tests with diaphysis/metaphysis failure.
112. With regard to limiting the maximum acceleration on the tibia, results of a series of
pedestrian PMHS tests performed with modern cars suggests that the maximum tibia
acceleration for the PMHS sustaining a tibia fracture was 170g to 270g, with the average
value of 222g. A value of 200g would correspond to a 50% injury risk. To protect a higher
proportion of the population at risk, the informal group recommends a maximum lateral
tibia acceleration limit of 170g.
113. In summary, it was concluded that the acceptance levels for the lower legform test
should be set at the following limits:
Maximum lateral knee bending angle ≤ 19.0°;
Maximum lateral knee shearing displacement ≤ 6.0mm;
Maximum lateral tibia acceleration ≤ 170g.
114. These values are identical to those under consideration by the EC in its review of the
Phase 2 requirements of the European Directive.
(iii)
Relaxation of Acceleration Limit
115. In order for the vehicle to provide adequate occupant protection in frontal crashes,
portions of the vehicle bumper structure will have to be stiff enough to enable the vehicle
to absorb a sufficient amount of the impact energy. In addition, the bumper structure
contains towing hooks and other devices. Because of these factors, certain portions of
the bumper will not be able to meet the maximum lateral tibia acceleration limit of 170g
across the full length of the bumper. For feasibility reasons, this gtr allows manufacturers
to nominate bumper test widths up to 264mm in total where the acceleration measured
at the upper end of the tibia shall not exceed 250g. The relaxation zone of 264mm
corresponds to an area that is twice the width of the legform.
(c)
Upper Legform Test for High Bumpers
116. As discussed above, the informal group recognized that the lower leg impactor test
would be inappropriate for vehicles whose bumpers strike the legs above knee level, but
the group believed that vehicles with high bumpers should be subject to a test that would
require the bumper to be more energy absorbing. For that reason, the informal working
group recommends an upper legform test for vehicles with a lower bumper height of
more than 500mm.
117. Data provided in INF GR/PS/175 Rev.2 indicate that, in order to meet the proposed
criteria for the upper legform test, energy absorbing foam will have to be added to the
bumper; such modifications are expected to reduce the risk of fractures which also
constitutes an important injury risk.

(b)
Active Devices to Protect Pedestrians
122. The issue of active devices to protect pedestrians, such as deployable bonnets, was also
discussed in detail. The group fully agreed that such devices must not create a higher
risk of injuries for the pedestrians. A document entitled "Certification Standard for Type
Approval Testing of Active Deployable Systems of the Bonnet/Windscreen Area,"
proposed by the industry (INF GR/PS/141) was found to be acceptable as a guideline for
certification of deployable devices, but the deployable devices clearly also need to satisfy
all other requirements of this gtr. Contracting Parties who wish to implement national test
procedures for these deployable devices may use the certification standard as its basis.
(c)
Impact on Existing Standards
123. During the discussions of the informal group, it was generally recognized that any
proposed legislative requirements on pedestrian protection should be assessed against
other vehicle parameters.
124. It was pointed out that both existing and future vehicle requirements should be taken into
account, internationally as well as nationally, to ensure that potential conflicts are
reduced as much as possible. The group also stressed that, in addition to legislative
requirements, other vehicle parameters also need verification, in terms of customer
satisfaction, repairability, insurance classification, comfort, handling, etc. A list of all
necessary parameters was drafted for evaluation (INF GR/PS/35). Impacts of these
standards and requirements were taken into account amongst others in the feasibility
studies detailed in working papers INF GR/PS/91 and 101.
9. REGULATORY IMPACT AND ECONOMIC EFFECTIVENESS
125. This global technical regulation is expected to reduce the number of pedestrian fatalities
and injuries resulting from head impacts against the bonnet and leg impacts with the
bumper. It will also maximize economic effectiveness of pedestrian protection regulations
globally.
126. It should not, however, be allowed to impose any restrictions on other measures, either
active or passive, which may be utilised by any Contracting Party to provide additional
benefits for the safety of vulnerable road users.
(a)
Benefits
127. The informal working group recognizes that there are many variables affecting the
potential benefits of this gtr, such as region-to-region differences in vehicle fleet
composition, in driver behaviour, in the degree to which existing vehicles now meet the
pedestrian protection requirements of this gtr or are otherwise equipped with safety
features beneficial to pedestrians, and in the prevalence of pedestrian-friendly
infrastructure. The group also recognizes that in estimating the potential benefits of this
gtr, jurisdictions differed to a degree in their methodology and assumptions so that a
direct comparison of benefits between regions was not possible. However, various
delegates have made very preliminary estimates of benefits based on limited data
currently available to the informal working group.

(c)
Other Analysis
132. The group did not have separate assessments of the potential leg/knee injury benefits
and costs from each of the other regions. Other countries are currently conducting such
studies and will consider the results when the gtr is established in their national
legislation. The preamble may be amended to incorporate the completed analyses.
10. APPENDIX − REFERENCE DOCUMENTS USED BY THE WORKING GROUP
A list of working papers used by the informal working group is listed and available on the
UNECE WP.29 website (http://www.unece.org/trans/main/welcwp29.htm).
Number of working paper
INF GR/PS/1 and Rev 1
INF GR/PS/2
INF GR/PS/3
INF GR/PS/4 and Rev 1
INF GR/PS/5
INF GR/PS/6
INF GR/PS/7
INF GR/PS/8 and Rev 1
INF GR/PS/9 and Rev 1
INF GR/PS/10
INF GR/PS/11
INF GR/PS/12
INF GR/PS/13
INF GR/PS/14
INF GR/PS/15
INF GR/PS/16
INF GR/PS/17
INF GR/PS/18
INF GR/PS/19
INF GR/PS/20
INF GR/PS/21
INF GR/PS/22
INF GR/PS/23
Title of informal document
Agenda 1st meeting
Terms of reference
IHRA accident study presentation
JMLIT proposed legislation
IHRA feasibility study
Japan information on possible scope
Attendance list 1st meeting
Draft Meeting Minutes 1st meeting
Report to GRSP 32 inf doc
Draft action plan
Agenda 2nd meeting
GIDAS accident data
GIDAS accident data graphs
Italian accident data
UN accident data
Spanish accident data
ACEA accident data
Draft Meeting Minutes 2nd meeting
Agenda 3rd meeting
Canadian accident data
Netherlands accident data
Scope overview
Draft content table preliminary report

Number of working paper
Title of informal document
INF GR/PS/51
INF GR/PS/52
INF GR/PS/53
INF GR/PS/54
INF GR/PS/55
INF GR/PS/56 and Rev 1
INF GR/PS/57
Attendance list 4th meeting
Provisional agenda for the 5th meeting
Draft gtr format
gtr proposal to WP.29
Draft gtr
Comparison table
Proposed schedule of the group
INF GR/PS/58 Presentation on vehicle shape, boundary line, ...
INF GR/PS/59
INF GR/PS/60
INF GR/PS/61 IHRA PS 237
INF GR/PS/62
INF GR/PS/63
INF GR/PS/64 and Rev 1
INF GR/PS/65 and Rev 1
INF GR/PS/66
INF GR/PS/67
INF GR/PS/68
INF GR/PS/69 and Rev 1
INF GR/PS/70
INF GR/PS/71
INF GR/PS/72
INF GR/PS/73
INF GR/PS/74
INF GR/PS/75
INF GR/PS/76
INF GR/PS/77
INF GR/PS/78
INF GR/PS/79
A-pillar IHRA OICA presentation
ISO/TC22/SC10/WG2 N613
Action plan from 5th meeting
Attendance list 5th meeting
Draft meeting minutes 5th meeting
Provisional agenda for the 6th meeting
AUS-NCAP pedestrian data
Test-method − active hood / bonnet systems
Target population head injuries − US
Working paper draft gtr
Korean information
Head test area windscreen + A-pillar
Head test data on windscreen
Head impact angle / speed re-assessment based on vehicle
geometry
IHRA/PS/270 headform impactor specification
Powerpoint explanation of PS/67
IHRA legform discussions
Corridors proposed by UVA (lower legform)
Bio rating method: Maltese
IHRA antropometric proposal

Number of working paper
Title of informal document
INF GR/PS/110
INF GR/PS/111 and Rev 1
INF GR/PS/112
INF GR/PS/113
INF GR/PS/114
INF GR/PS/115 and Rev 1
INF GR/PS/116
OICA proposal for side and rear windscreen reference line
Guideline for preamble
Action plan
Revision of draft gtr
Attendance list
Draft meeting minutes of the 7th meeting
Cleaned up version of draft gtr
INF GR/PS/117 Preamble and draft gtr off doc for GRSP 37
INF GR/PS/118 and Rev 1
INF GR/PS/119
INF GR/PS/120
INF GR/PS/121
INF GR/PS/122
INF GR/PS/123
INF GR/PS/124
INF GR/PS/125
INF GR/PS/126
Provisional agenda for the 8th meeting
ISO Activities for Pedestrian Safety
EC final feasibility study
GRSP/2005/3 as amended during GRSP/37
GRSP-37-18
GRSP-37-15
GRSP-37-16
Short report on comments received during GRSP-37
July meeting task list
INF GR/PS/127 Presentation on EU Phase 2
INF GR/PS/128
The need for harmonized legislation on pedestrian protection
INF GR/PS/129 Comparison between the J standard and the EU Phase 2
proposal for head testing
INF GR/PS/130
INF GR/PS/131
INF GR/PS/132
INF GR/PS/133 and Rev 1
INF GR/PS/134
List of references for EU / EEVC on head impact angles
Analysis of pedestrian accident situation and portion addressed
by this gtr
gtr testing and what it means for the US situation
INF GR/PS/135 OICA proposal for § 3.33
INF GR/PS/136
INF GR/PS/137
INF GR/PS/138
INF GR/PS/139
Proposal to solve the undamped accelerometer problem
Concerns on § 7.4 with testing on the centre of the windscreen
OICA proposal for a mass for the upper leg impactor
OICA proposal on definition of high bumper vehicles
Economic effectiveness study from Korea
Action list of 8th meeting

Number of working paper
Title of informal document
INF GR/PS/170
INF GR/PS/171
INF GR/PS/172
INF GR/PS/173
INF GR/PS/174 and Rev 1
INF GR/PS/175 and
Rev 1 / 2
INF GR/PS/176 and
Rev 1 / 2
INF GR/PS/177
INF GR/PS/178
INF GR/PS/179
INF GR/PS/180
INF GR/PS/181
INF GR/PS/182
INF GR/PS/183
INF GR/PS/184
Target population for this gtr
Draft meeting minutes of the 9th meeting
Attendance list 9th meeting
Provisional agenda for the 10th meeting
Lower leg tests − EuroNCAP data − OICA presentation for
Jan 06 meeting
Bumper Reference Lines − OICA presentation for Jan 06
meeting
Headform test results − OICA presentation for Jan 06 meeting
IHRA/PS Proposal for the Moment of Inertia of gtr Adult-Child
Headform Impactors
Expected life-saving effect_gtr_Head_Japan
Ongoing Researches on Pedestrian Leg Injuries Assessment
OICA position on the change of the definition of the ble
reference line
Comparison lower leg injuries for different AIS levels
Foam memory for changing humidity
OICA position on bonnet leading edge 165mm exemption zone
Final draft gtr (without preamble)
INF GR/PS/185 Mr Saul letter dated on 3/1/2006
INF GR/PS/186
INF GR/PS/187
INF GR/PS/188
INF GR/PS/189
GRSP-47-18/Rev.2
NHTSA revision of preamble PS/160
EEVC WG17 report
Draft meeting minutes of the 100th meeting
Attendance list 10th meeting
(USA) Proposal for amendments to Global Technical Regulation
No. 9 (Pedestrian Safety)

3.2. "A-pillar" means the foremost and outermost roof support extending from the chassis to
the roof of the vehicle.
3.3. "Bonnet leading edge" means the edge of the front upper outer structure of the vehicle,
including the bonnet and wings, the upper and side members of the headlight surrounds
and any other attachments. The reference line identifying the position of the bonnet
leading edge is defined by its height above the ground reference plane and by the
horizontal distance separating it from the bumper (bumper lead).
3.4. "Bonnet leading edge height" means, at any point on the bonnet leading edge, the
vertical distance between the ground reference plane and the bonnet leading edge
reference line at that point.
3.5. "Bonnet leading edge reference line" means the geometric trace of the points of
contact between a straight edge 1,000mm long and the front surface of the bonnet, when
the straight edge, held parallel to the vertical longitudinal plane of the car and inclined
rearwards by 50° from the vertical and with the lower end 600mm above the ground, is
traversed across and in contact with the bonnet leading edge (see Figure 1).
For vehicles having the bonnet top surface inclined at 50°, so that the straight edge
makes a continuous contact or multiple contacts rather than a point contact, determine
the reference line with the straight edge inclined rearwards at an angle of 40° from the
vertical.
For vehicles of such shape that the bottom end of the straight edge makes first contact
with the vehicle then that contact is taken to be the bonnet leading edge reference line,
at that lateral position.
For vehicles of such shape that the top end of the straight edge makes first contact with
the vehicle then the geometric trace of 1,000mm wrap around distance, will be used as
bonnet leading edge reference line at that lateral position.
The top edge of the bumper shall also be regarded as the bonnet leading edge if it is
contacted by the straight edge during this procedure.

3.11. "Centre of the knee" of the lower legform impactor is defined as the point about which
the knee effectively bends.
3.12. "Child headform test area" is an area on the outer surfaces of the front structure. The
area is bounded, in the front, by the front reference line for child headform, and, at the
rear, by the WAD1700 line, and by the side reference lines.
3.13. "Corner of bumper" means the vehicle's point of contact with a vertical plane which
makes an angle of 60° with the vertical longitudinal plane of the car and is tangential to
the outer surface of the bumper (see Figure 5).
3.14. "Femur" of the lower legform impactor is defined as all components or parts of
components (including flesh, skin covering, damper, instrumentation and brackets,
pulleys, etc. attached to the impactor for the purpose of launching it) above the level of
the centre of the knee.
3.15. "Front reference line for child headform" means the geometric trace as described on
the vehicle front structure using a WAD1000 line. In the case of vehicles where the wrap
around distance to the bonnet leading edge reference line, is more than 1,000mm at any
point, then the bonnet leading edge reference line will be used as the front reference line
for child headform at that point.
3.16. "Front structure" means all outer structures of the vehicle except the windscreen, the
windscreen header, the A-pillars and structures rearward of these. It therefore includes,
but is not limited to, the bumper, the bonnet, wings, scuttle, wiper spindles and lower
windscreen frame.
3.17. "Ground reference plane" means a horizontal plane, either real or imaginary, that
passes through the lowest points of contact for all tyres of a vehicle while the vehicle is in
its normal ride attitude. If the vehicle is resting on the ground, then the ground level and
the ground reference plane are one and the same. If the vehicle is raised off the ground
such as to allow extra clearance below the bumper, then the ground reference plane is
above ground level.
3.18. "Head Injury Criterion (HIC)" means the calculated result of accelerometer time
histories using the following formula:
Where:


⎢⎣
t
1
− t


⎥⎦
HIC = a dt ( t − t )

a is the resultant acceleration measured in units of gravity "g"
(1g = 9.81 m/s²);
t and t
are the two time instants (expressed in seconds) during the impact, defining
an interval between the beginning and the end of the recording period for
which the value of HIC is a maximum (t - t ≤ 15 ms)

3.27. "Upper bumper reference line" means the upper limit to significant points of pedestrian
contact with the bumper. For vehicles with an identifiable bumper structure it is defined
as the geometric trace of the uppermost points of contact between a straight edge and
the bumper, when the straight edge, held parallel to the vertical longitudinal plane of the
car and inclined rearwards by 20° to the vertical, is traversed across the front of the car,
while maintaining contact with the surface of the bumper (see Figure 9).
For vehicles with no identifiable bumper structure it is defined as the geometric trace of
the uppermost points of contact between a straight edge 700mm long and the bumper
area, when the straight edge, held parallel to the vertical longitudinal plane of the car and
inclined rearwards by 20° from the vertical is traversed across the front of the car, while
maintaining contact with the ground and with the surface of the bumper area (see
Figure 9).
3.28. "Wrap Around Distance (WAD)" means the geometric trace described on the outer
surface of the vehicle front structure by one end of a flexible tape, when it is held in a
vertical longitudinal plane of the vehicle and traversed across the front structure. The
tape is held taut throughout the operation with one end held at the same level as the
ground reference level, vertically below the front face of the bumper and the other end
held in contact with the front structure (see Figure 10). The vehicle is positioned in the
normal ride attitude.
This procedure shall be followed, using alternative tapes of appropriate lengths, to
describe wrap around distances of 1,000mm (WAD1000), of 1,700mm (WAD1700) and
of 2,100mm (WAD2100).
3.29. "Windscreen" means the frontal glazing of the vehicle situated between the A-pillars.
Straight edge
1,000 mm long
Bonnet leading edge
reference line
50°
600 mm
Figure 1
Bonnet Leading Edge Reference Line (see Paragraph 3.5.)

New / Modified
end of Bonnet Rear
Reference Line
Old / Discarded end
of Bonnet Rear
Reference Line
Windscreen
Semi-circular
Template
Bonnet Side
Reference Line
Bonnet Rear
Reference Line
Figure 4
Marking of Intersection Between Bonnet Rear and Side Reference Lines
(see Paragraph 3.6.)
Corner of bumper
Vertical plane
Figure 5
Corner of Bumper (see Paragraph 3.13.)

Bonnet side
reference line
Straight edge
700 mm long
45°
Figure 8
Side Reference Line (see Paragraph 3.24.)
Straight edge
700 mm long
UBRL
UBRL
UBRL
20°
Figure 9
Upper Bumper Reference Line, UBRL (see Paragraph 3.27.)

4.1.2. Upper Legform to Bumper:
To verify compliance with the performance requirements as specified in
Paragraph 5.1.2., both the test impactor specified in Paragraph 6.3.1.2. and the test
procedures specified in Paragraph 7.1.2. shall be used.
4.2. Child Headform Impact:
To verify compliance with the performance requirements as specified in
Paragraph 5.2.1., both the test impactor specified in Paragraph 6.3.2.1. and the test
procedures specified in Paragraphs 7.2. and 7.3. shall be used.
4.3. Adult Headform Impact:
To verify compliance with the performance requirements as specified in
Paragraph 5.2.2., both the test impactor specified in Paragraph 6.3.2.2. and the test
procedures specified in Paragraphs 7.2. and 7.4. shall be used.
5. PERFORMANCE REQUIREMENTS
5.1. Legform to Bumper:
5.1.1. When tested in accordance with Paragraph 7.1.1. (lower legform to bumper), the
maximum dynamic knee bending angle shall not exceed 19°, the maximum dynamic
knee shearing displacement shall not exceed 6.0mm, and the acceleration measured at
the upper end of the tibia shall not exceed 170g. In addition, the manufacturer may
nominate bumper test widths up to a maximum of 264mm in total where the acceleration
measured at the upper end of the tibia shall not exceed 250g.
5.1.2. When tested in accordance with Paragraph 7.1.2. (upper legform to bumper), the
instantaneous sum of the impact forces with respect to time shall not exceed 7.5 kN and
the bending moment on the test impactor shall not exceed 510Nm.
5.2. Headform Tests
5.2.1. Child headform to the front structure:
When tested in accordance with Paragraphs 7.2. and 7.3. the HIC shall comply with
Paragraph 5.2.3.
5.2.2. Adult headform to the front structure:
When tested in accordance with Paragraph 7.2. and 7.4. the HIC shall comply with
Paragraph 5.2.3.
5.2.3. The HIC recorded shall not exceed 1,000 over a minimum of one half of the child
headform test area and 1,000 over two thirds of the combined child and adult headform
test areas. The HIC for the remaining areas shall not exceed 1,700 for both headforms.
In case there is only a child headform test area, the HIC recorded shall not exceed 1,000
over two thirds of the test area. For the remaining area the HIC shall not exceed 1,700.

6. TEST SPECIFICATIONS
6.1. General Test Conditions
6.1.1. Temperature and Humidity
At the time of testing, the test facility and the vehicle or sub-system shall have a relative
humidity of 40% ± 30% and stabilized temperature of 20 + 4° C.
6.1.2. Impact Test Site
The test site shall consist of a flat, smooth and hard surface with a slope not exceeding
1%.
6.2. Preparation of the Vehicle
6.2.1. Either a complete vehicle, or a cut-body, adjusted to the following conditions shall be
used for the test.
6.2.1.1. The vehicle shall be in its normal ride attitude, and shall be either securely mounted on
raised supports or at rest on a flat horizontal surface with the parking brake applied.
6.2.1.2. The cut-body shall include, in the test, all parts of the vehicle front structure, all
under-bonnet components and all components behind the windscreen that may be
involved in a frontal impact with a vulnerable road user, to demonstrate the performance
and interactions of all the contributory vehicle components. The cut-body shall be
securely mounted in the normal vehicle ride attitude.
6.2.2. All devices designed to protect vulnerable road users when impacted by the vehicle shall
be correctly activated before and/or be active during the relevant test. It shall be the
responsibility of the manufacturer to show that any devices will act as intended in a
pedestrian impact.
6.2.3. For vehicle components which could change shape or position, other than active devices
to protect pedestrians, and which have more than one fixed shape or position shall
require the vehicle to comply with the components in each fixed shape or position.
6.3. Test Impactor Specifications
6.3.1. Legform Impactors:
6.3.1.1. Lower Legform Impactor:
The lower legform impactor shall consist of two foam covered rigid segments,
representing femur (upper leg) and tibia (lower leg), joined by a deformable, simulated
knee joint. The overall length of the impactor shall be 926 ± 5mm, having a required test
mass of 13.4 ± 0.2kg (see Figure 12). Dimensions of the various parts are detailed in
Figure 12.
Brackets, pulleys, etc. attached to the impactor for the purpose of launching it, may
extend the dimensions shown in Figure 12.

6.3.1.1.7.2. The certified impactor may be used for a maximum of 20 impacts before re-certification.
With each test new plastically deformable knee elements should be used. The impactor
shall also be re-certified if more than one year has elapsed since the previous
certification, if any impactor transducer output, in any impact, has exceeded the specified
CAC or has reached the mechanical limits of the leg impactor deformation capability.
Figure 12
Lower Legform Impactor (see Paragraph 6.3.1.1.)

6.3.1.2.9. Upper Legform Instrumentation
6.3.1.2.9.1. The front member shall be strain gauged to measure bending moments in three
positions, as shown in Figure 13, each using a separate channel. The strain gauges are
located on the impactor on the back of the front member. The two outer strain gauges
are located 50 ± 1mm from the impactor's symmetrical axis. The middle strain gauge is
located on the symmetrical axis with a ± 1mm tolerance.
6.3.1.2.9.2. Two load transducers shall be fitted to measure individually the forces applied at either
end of the upper legform impactor, plus strain gauges measuring bending moments at
the centre of the upper legform impactor and at positions 50mm either side of the centre
line (see Figure 13).
6.3.1.2.9.3. The instrumentation response value CFC, as defined in ISO 6487:2002, shall be 180 for
all transducers. The CAC response values, as defined in ISO 6487:2002, shall be 10 kN
for the force transducers and 1,000Nm for the bending moment measurements.
6.3.1.2.10. Upper Legform Certification
6.3.1.2.10.1. The upper legform impactor shall meet the performance requirements specified in
Paragraph 8.

6.3.2. Child and Adult Headform Impactors
6.3.2.1. Child Headform Impactor (see Figure 14)
The child headform impactor shall be made of aluminium, be of homogenous
construction and be of spherical shape. The overall diameter shall be 165 ± 1mm. The
mass shall be 3.5 ± 0.07kg. The moment of inertia about an axis through the centre of
gravity and perpendicular to the direction of impact shall be within the range of 0.008 to
0.012kgm . The centre of gravity of the headform impactor including instrumentation
shall be located in the geometric centre of the sphere with a tolerance of ± 2mm.
The sphere shall be covered with a 14 ± 0.5mm thick synthetic skin, which shall cover at
least half of the sphere.
6.3.2.1.1. Child Headform Instrumentation
A recess in the sphere shall allow for mounting one triaxial or three uniaxial
accelerometers within ± 10mm seismic mass location tolerance from the centre of the
sphere for the measurement axis, and ± 1mm seismic mass location tolerance from the
centre of the sphere for the perpendicular direction to the measurement axis.
If three uniaxial accelerometers are used, one of the accelerometers shall have its
sensitive axis perpendicular to the mounting face A (see Figure 14) and its seismic mass
shall be positioned within a cylindrical tolerance field of 1mm radius and 20mm length.
The centre line of the tolerance field shall run perpendicular to the mounting face and its
mid-point shall coincide with the centre of the sphere of the headform impactor.
The remaining accelerometers shall have their sensitive axes perpendicular to each
other and parallel to the mounting face A and their seismic mass shall be positioned
within a spherical tolerance field of 10mm radius. The centre of the tolerance field shall
coincide with the centre of the sphere of the headform impactor.
The instrumentation response value CFC, as defined in ISO 6487: 2002, shall be 1,000.
The CAC response value, as defined in ISO 6487:2002, shall be 500g for the
acceleration.

6.3.2.2. Adult Headform Impactor (see Figure 15)
The adult headform impactor shall be made of aluminium, be of homogenous
construction and be of spherical shape. The overall diameter is 165 ± 1mm as shown in
Figure 15. The mass shall be 4.5 ± 0.1kg. The moment of inertia about an axis through
the centre of gravity and perpendicular to the direction of impact shall be within the range
of 0.010 to 0.013kgm . The centre of gravity of the headform impactor including
instrumentation shall be located in the geometric centre of the sphere with a tolerance of
± 5mm.
The sphere shall be covered with a 14 ± 0.5mm thick synthetic skin, which shall cover at
least half of the sphere.
End Plate
Accelerometer
Skin
Sphere
14 mm
Sphere 165 mm
Figure 15
Adult Headform Impactor (see Paragraph 6.3.2.2)

7. TEST PROCEDURES
7.1. Legform to Bumper Test Procedures
7.1.1. Lower Legform to Bumper Test Procedure:
Each test shall be completed within two hours of when the impactor to be used is
removed from the controlled storage area.
7.1.1.1. The selected target points shall be in the bumper test area.
7.1.1.2. The direction of the impact velocity vector shall be in the horizontal plane and parallel to
the longitudinal vertical plane of the vehicle. The tolerance for the direction of the velocity
vector in the horizontal plane and in the longitudinal plane shall be ± 2° at the time of first
contact. The axis of the impactor shall be perpendicular to the horizontal plane with a
tolerance of ± 2° in the lateral and longitudinal plane. The horizontal, longitudinal and
lateral planes are orthogonal to each other (see Figure 16).
7.1.1.3. The bottom of the impactor shall be at 25mm above ground reference plane at the time
of first contact with the bumper (see Figure 17), with a ± 10mm tolerance. When setting
the height of the propulsion system, an allowance must be made for the influence of
gravity during the period of free flight of the impactor.
7.1.1.3.1. The lower legform impactor for the bumper tests shall be in 'free flight' at the moment of
impact. The impactor shall be released to free flight at such a distance from the vehicle
that the test results are not influenced by contact of the impactor with the propulsion
system during rebound of the impactor.
The impactor may be propelled by an air, spring or hydraulic gun, or by other means that
can be shown to give the same result.
7.1.1.3.2. At the time of first contact the impactor shall have the intended orientation about its
vertical axis, for the correct operation of its knee joint, with a tolerance of ± 5° (see
Figure 16).
7.1.1.3.3. At the time of first contact the centre line of the impactor shall be within a ± 10mm
tolerance to the selected impact location.
7.1.1.3.4. During contact between the impactor and the vehicle, the impactor shall not contact the
ground or any object which is not part of the vehicle.

Impactor in free flight
Ground reference plane
= ground level
25mm
(at impact)
Ground level
Support
Ground reference plane
Figure 17
Lower Legform to Bumper Tests for Complete Vehicle in Normal Ride Attitude
(Left) and for Cut-body Mounted on Supports (Right) (see Paragraph 7.1.1.3)
7.1.2. Upper Legform to Bumper Test Procedure:
Each test shall be completed within two hours of when the impactor to be used is
removed from the controlled storage area.
7.1.2.1. The selected target points shall be in the bumper test area as defined in Paragraph 3.10.
7.1.2.2. The direction of impact shall be parallel to the longitudinal axis of the vehicle, with the
axis of the upper legform vertical at the time of first contact. The tolerance to this
direction is ± 2°.
At the time of first contact the impactor centre line shall be vertically midway between the
upper bumper reference line and the lower bumper reference line with a ± 10mm
tolerance and the impactor vertical centre line shall be positioned laterally with the
selected impact location with a tolerance of ± 10mm.
7.1.2.3. The impact velocity of the upper legform impactor when striking the bumper shall be
11.1 ± 0.2 m/s.

7.3.2. No impact point shall be located so that the impactor will impact the test area with a
glancing blow resulting in a more severe second impact outside the test area.
Selected impact points on the bonnet for the child headform impactor shall be, at the
time of first contact:
(a)
(b)
a minimum of 82.5mm inside the defined side reference lines, and;
forward of the WAD1700 line, or,
a minimum of 82.5mm forwards of the bonnet rear reference line,

whichever is most forward at the point of measurement, and;
(c)
be rearward of the WAD1000 line, or,
a minimum of 82.5mm rearwards of the bonnet leading edge reference line,

whichever is most rearward at the point of measurement.
These minimum distances are to be set with a flexible tape held tautly along the outer
surface of the vehicle.
7.3.3. The point of first contact of the headform impactor shall be within a ± 10mm tolerance to
the selected impact point.
7.3.4. The headform velocity at the time of impact shall be 9.7 ± 0.2 m/s.
7.3.5. The direction of impact shall be in the longitudinal vertical plane of the vehicle to be
tested at an angle of 50 ± 2° to the horizontal. The direction of impact of tests to the front
structure shall be downward and rearward.
7.4. Adult Headform Test Procedure:
This test procedure is applicable with respect to the requirements of Paragraphs 5.2.2.
and 5.2.3.
7.4.1. Tests shall be made to the front structure within the boundaries as defined in
Paragraph 3.1. For tests at the rear of the bonnet top, the headform impactor shall not
contact the windscreen or A-pillar before impacting the bonnet top.

8.1. Lower Legform Impactor Certification
8.1.1. Static Tests
8.1.1.1. The lower legform impactor shall meet the requirements specified in Paragraph 8.1.1.2.
when tested as specified in Paragraph 8.1.1.4. and the requirements specified in
Paragraph 8.1.1.3. when tested as specified in Paragraph 8.1.1.5.
For both tests the impactor shall have the intended orientation about its longitudinal axis,
for the correct operation of its knee joint, with a tolerance of ± 2°.
The stabilized temperature of the impactor during certification shall be 20° ± 2° C.
The CAC response values, as defined in ISO 6487:2002 shall be 50° for the knee
bending angle and 500 N for the applied force when the impactor is loaded in bending in
accordance with Paragraph 8.1.1.4., and 10mm for the shearing displacement and 10 kN
for the applied force when the impactor is loaded in shearing in accordance with
Paragraph 8.1.1.5. For both tests low-pass filtering at an appropriate frequency is
permitted, to remove higher frequency noise without significantly affecting the
measurement of the response of the impactor.
8.1.1.2. When the impactor is loaded in bending in accordance with Paragraph 8.1.1.4., the
applied force/bending angle response shall be within the limits shown in Figure 18. Also,
the energy taken to generate 15.0° of bending shall be 100 ± 7 J.
8.1.1.3. When the impactor is loaded in shearing in accordance with Paragraph 8.1.1.5., the
applied force/shearing displacement response shall be within the limits shown in
Figure 19.
8.1.1.4. The impactor, without foam covering and skin, shall be mounted with the tibia firmly
clamped to a fixed horizontal surface and a metal tube connected firmly to the femur, as
shown in Figure 20. The rotational axis of the impactor knee joint shall be vertical. To
avoid friction errors, no support shall be provided to the femur section or the metal tube.
The bending moment applied at the centre of the knee joint, due to the mass of the metal
tube and other components (excluding the legform itself), shall not exceed 25Nm.
A horizontal normal force shall be applied to the metal tube at a distance of 2.0 ± 0.01 m
from the centre of the knee joint and the resulting angle of knee deflection shall be
recorded. The load shall be increased at a rate between 1.0 and 10°/s until the angle of
deflection of the knee is in excess of 22°. Brief excursions from these limits due, for
instance, to the use of a hand-pump shall be permitted.
The energy is calculated by integrating the force with respect to the bending angle in
radians, and multiplying by the lever length of 2.0 ± 0.01 m.

8.1.2.4. Test Procedure
8.1.2.4.1. The impactor, including foam covering and skin, shall be suspended horizontally by three
wire ropes of 1.5 ± 0.2mm diameter and of 2000mm minimum length, as shown in Figure
22. It shall be suspended with its longitudinal axis horizontal, with a tolerance of ± 0.5°,
and perpendicular to the direction of the certification impactor motion, with a tolerance of
± 2°. The impactor shall have the intended orientation about its longitudinal axis, for the
correct operation of its knee joint, with a tolerance of ± 2°. The impactor must meet the
requirements of Paragraph 6.3.1.1., with the attachment bracket(s) for the wire ropes
fitted.
8.1.2.4.2. The certification impactor shall have a mass of 9.0 ± 0.05kg, this mass includes those
propulsion and guidance components which are effectively part of the impactor during
impact. The dimensions of the face of the certification impactor shall be as specified in
Figure 23. The face of the certification impactor shall be made of aluminium, with an
outer surface finish of better than 2.0 micrometers.
The guidance system shall be fitted with low friction guides, insensitive to off-axis
loading, that allow the impactor to move only in the specified direction of impact, when in
contact with the vehicle. The guides shall prevent motion in other directions including
rotation about any axis.
8.1.2.4.3. The impactor shall be certified with previously unused foam.
8.1.2.4.4. The impactor foam shall not be excessively handled or deformed before, during or after
fitting.
8.1.2.4.5. The certification impactor shall be propelled horizontally at a velocity of 7.5 ± 0.1 m/s into
the stationary impactor as shown in Figure 23. The certification impactor shall be
positioned so that its centreline aligns with a position on the tibia centreline of 50mm
from the centre of the knee, with tolerances of ± 3mm laterally and ± 3mm vertically.
8.2. Upper Legform Impactor Certification
8.2.1. The upper legform impactor shall meet the requirements specified in Paragraph 8.2.3.
when tested as specified in Paragraph 8.2.4.
8.2.2. Calibration
8.2.2.1. The foam flesh for the test impactor shall be stored for a period of at least four hours in a
controlled storage area with a stabilized humidity of 35 ± 10% and a stabilized
temperature of 20° ± 2° C prior to impactor removal for calibration. The test impactor
itself shall have a temperature of 20° ± 2° C at the time of impact. The temperature
tolerances for the test impactor shall apply at a relative humidity of 40 ± 30% after a soak
period of at least four hours prior to their application in a test.
8.2.2.2. The test facility used for the calibration test shall have a stabilized humidity of 40 ± 30%
and a stabilized temperature of 20° ± 4° C during calibration.
8.2.2.3. Each calibration shall be completed within two hours of when the impactor to be
calibrated is removed from the controlled storage area.

8.2.4.7. The pendulum tube shall have a mass of 3 ± 0.03kg, a wall thickness of 3 ± 0.15mm and
an outside diameter of 150mm / . Total pendulum tube length shall be 275 ±
25mm. The pendulum tube shall be made from cold finished seamless steel (metal
surface plating is permissible for protection from corrosion), with an outer surface finish
of better than 2.0 micrometer. It shall be suspended on two wire ropes of 1.5 ± 0.2mm
diameter and of 2.0 m minimum length. The surface of the pendulum shall be clean and
dry. The pendulum tube shall be positioned so that the longitudinal axis of the cylinder is
perpendicular to the front member (i.e. level), with a tolerance of ± 2°, and to the
direction of impactor motion, with a tolerance of ± 2°, and with the centre of the
pendulum tube aligned with the centre of the impactor front member, with tolerances of
± 5mm laterally and ± 5mm vertically.
8.3. Child and Adult Headform Impactors Certification
8.3.1. Drop Test
8.3.1.1. Performance Criteria
8.3.2. Requirements
The headform impactors shall meet the requirements specified in Paragraph 8.3.2. when
tested as specified in Paragraph 8.3.3.
8.3.2.1. When the headform impactors are dropped from a height of 376 ± 1mm in accordance
with Paragraph 8.3.3. the peak resultant acceleration measured by one triaxial (or three
uniaxial) accelerometer (accelerometers) in the headform impactor shall be:
(a) for the child headform impactor not less than 245g and not more than 300g;
(b) for the adult headform impactor not less than 225g and not more than 275g.
The acceleration time curve shall be uni-modal.
8.3.2.2. The instrumentation response values CFC and CAC for each accelerometer shall be
1,000 Hz and 500g respectively as defined in ISO 6487:2002.
8.3.2.3. Temperature Conditions
The headform impactors shall have a temperature of 20 ± 2° C at the time of impact. The
temperature tolerances shall apply at a relative humidity of 40 ± 30% after a soak period
of at least four hours prior to their application in a test.
8.3.2.4. After complying with the certification test, each headform impactor can be used for a
maximum of 20 impact tests.

Figure 19
Force Versus Displacement Requirement in Static Lower Legform
Impactor Shearing Certification Test (see Paragraph 8.1.1.3.)

Figure 22
Test Set-up for Dynamic Lower Legform Impactor Certification Test
(Side View Top Diagram, View from Above Bottom Diagram) (see Paragraph 8.1.2.4.1.)

Figure 24
Test Set-up for Dynamic Upper Legform Impactor Certification Test
(see Paragraph 8.2.4.6)
Figure 25
Test Set-up for Dynamic Headform Impactor Biofidelity Test
(see Paragraph 8.3.3.1.)
Pedestrian Safety.