SafetyCompanion 2020 en

SAFETY
COMPANION
morrowʼs Automotive Engineering
Knowledge for To
SEMINARS CONFERENCES KNOWLEDGE

Active & Passive Safety News & Updates Tables & Graphs
Dummy & Crash Test Knowledge Exchange & Summarizing all important
Engineering & Simulation Networking for Experts Rules & Regulations in
Vehicle Safety
gns – GESELLSCHAFT FÜR
NUMERISCHE SIMULATION MBH
Am Gaußberg 2 38114 Braunschweig
Phone: 0531-80112-0 [email protected]
SOLUTIONS
for the automotive Industry
ENGINEERING SOFTWARE DEVELOPEMENT CONSULTING
OPENFORM
The industrial solution for
sheet metal forming simulation
Extremely easy to use, wide range
of applications, highly accurate
results, open concept
GENERATOR 4
Pedestrian & Occupant Safety at its best
Fulfill various regulations:
FMVSS201, ECE-R21,
2003/102/EC, EuroNCAP...
ANIMATOR 4
The next generation of
FEA postprocessing
Handle plot and time history
data in one superior user
interface while working
with large models!
www.gns-mbh.com
SafetyCompanion
Advertisement
2020
There’s no
second chance
for a crash test Passive Safety
Page 13 - 113
Dummy & Crash Test
Page 114 - 126

961-326e-08.19
Your first choice when it comes to reliable

measurement: the Kistler Digital Transducer
Interface (DTI). The made-to-measure
technology for the THOR-Dummy. For an Active Safety,
uncomplicated, precise and efficient data Driver Assistance &
autonomous Driving
acquisition.
Page 127 - 161
www.kistler.com
Simulation &
Engineering
Page 162 - 178

SAFETY
WISSEN
SafetyWissen Navigator
Canada CMVSS § Euro NCAP
 EU §
208 Frontal.............80 Frontal........ 28, 32, 83 Overview.................19
214 Side..................88 Side............. 28, 41, 88 78/2009..................98
226 Ejection Mit. ... 94 Whiplash...............105 631/2009................98
Rescue.....................45
§
Pedestrian...............98
U.S. FMVSS Child Prot..............109
Overview.................19 Assistance Syst.....128
126 ESC.................142 AEB...............128, 143
201U........................96 LSS..........................155
202a.......................105 Overall Rating.........46
208 Frontal.............80 Dual Rating..............46
214 Side..................88
216a Roof Crush.....76
226 Ejection Mitig..94
305 EVs....................24
U.S. NCAP

Frontal...............28, 48
Side............. 28, 48, 88
Pole............. 28, 48, 88
Rollover / SSF........130
CIB..........................158
FCW.......................158
LDW.......................130
Rear Auto Brake...159
Overall Rating.........50
IIHS

Frontal........ 28, 52, 83
Side............. 28, 53, 88
Whiplash..52,105,107
Roof Crush........53, 76
Top Safety Pick.......53 Impactors/Dummies
Small Overlap...28, 54 Size/Weight..........122
Bumper Test.........112 Dummies...............118
AEB / FCW.............157 THOR.....................120
Advanced Light.....130

aPLI........................124
Bharat NCAP
Flex PLI...................124

Upper Legform.....124 Overall Rating.........72
Latin NCAP
Head Impactors....124
India AIS §

Frontal ..............28, 58
RCAR
Side....................28, 60 Overview.................19
Child Prot..............110 Whiplash ..............107 098 Frontal.............20
Assistance Syst.....128 Bumper.................112 099 Side..................21
4
SAFETY
WISSEN
GTR § UN ECE § JNCAP


Overview.................19 Overview.................19 Frontal........ 29, 65, 83
8 ESC......................142 R21...........................96 Side............. 29, 65, 93
9 Pedestrian............98 R94 Frtl....... 20, 25, 80 Whiplash........ 66, 105
14 Pole....................88 R95 Side..... 21, 25, 88 ASV........................130
R100 .......................25 Pedestrian...............98
R127........................98 Overall Rating.........66
R135 Pole..........21, 88
R137 Frontal.....20, 80
R140 ESC ..............142
Japan §
Art. 18Frontal.........20
R.E.3: Veh. Classes.113
Art. 18 Side.............21
Art. 18 Ped..............98
KNCAP

Frontal...............29, 68
Side....................29, 68
Whiplash........ 68, 105
Pedestrian...............98
Child Prot..............111
Brakes....................130
Rollover/SSF..........130
Assistance Syst.....130
Korea KMVSS §
102 Frontal.............20
102 Side..................21
102-2 Pedestrian....98
China NCAP

Frontal ....... 29, 62, 83
Side ............ 29, 64, 93
Whiplash........ 64, 105
Assistance syst......160
China GB §
ANCAP
→ Euro NCAP
 Overview.................19
11551 Frontal.........20
20913 Frontal.........20
20071 Side..............21
Australia ADR § ASEAN NCAP 37337 Pole..............21
69/00 Frontal....20, 80
73/00 Frontal....20, 80

Overall.....................61
Frontal ..............29, 61
C-IASI

72/00 Side...............21 Child Prot....... 61, 110 Small Overlap .........29
85/00 Pole..............21 Assistance Syst.....128 Side..........................29
5
carhs.training
Seminar Guide
Here you find the courses you need to get your job done!
Frontal Impact Pedestrian Protection

► Workshop Euro NCAP MPDB Frontal Crash ► PraxisConference Pedestrian Protection
p. 38 p. 99
► Knee Mapping Workshop p. 40 ► Pedestrian Protection Strategies p. 104
► Development of Frontal Restraint Systems ► Pedestrian Protection - Test Procedures
p. 79 p. 126
► Rear Seat Occupant Protection ► Pedestrian Protection Workshops p. 126
in Frontal Impact p. 86 ► Automotive Safety Summit Shanghai p. 13
► Automotive Safety Summit Shanghai p. 13 ► SafetyUpDate p. 15
SafetyUpDate p. 15 ► Introduction to Passive Safety p. 16
► Introduction to Passive Safety p. 16 ► International Safety and Crash-Test
► International Safety and Crash-Test Regulations p. 18
Regulations p. 18 ► NCAP - New Car Assessment Programs
► NCAP - New Car Assessment Programs p. 30
p. 30 ► Crashworthy and Lightweight Car Body
► Crashworthy and Lightweight Car Body Design p. 75
Design p. 75
► Crash-Sensing and Intelligent Restraint
Systems p. 87
Rear Impact
► Whiplash Testing and Evaluation
in Rear Impacts p. 108
Side Impact ► SafetyUpDate p. 15
► Side Impact – Requirements and ► Introduction to Passive Safety p. 16
Development Strategies p. 92 ► International Safety and Crash-Test
► Automotive Safety Summit Shanghai p. 13 Regulations p. 18
► SafetyUpDate p. 15 ► NCAP - New Car Assessment Programs
► Introduction to Passive Safety p. 16 p. 30
► International Safety and Crash-Test
Regulations p. 18
► NCAP - New Car Assessment Programs
p. 30 Dummies + Crash Test
► Crashworthy and Lightweight Car Body ► SafetyTesting p. 114
Design p. 75 ► Introduction to Data Acquisition p. 116
► Dummy Training p. 123
► Automotive Safety Summit Shanghai p. 13
► SafetyUpDate p. 15
Restraint Systems ► Introduction to Passive Safety p. 16
► Development of Frontal Restraint Systems
p. 79
► Early Increase of Design Maturity of Restraint
System Components in the Reduced Proto-
type Vehicle Development Process p. 82
► Rear Seat Occupant Protection in Frontal
Impact p. 86
► Crash-Sensing and Intelligent Restraint
Systems p. 87
► Automotive Safety Summit Shanghai p. 13
► SafetyUpDate p. 15
► Introduction to Passive Safety p. 16 Legend
► Seminar/Event that focusses on this topic
► Seminar/Event that deals with this topic
(among others)
6
carhs.training
Regulations and Requirements Accident Avoidance, Automated Driving

► International Safety and Crash-Test ► Introduction to Active Safety p. 127
Regulations p. 18 ► Briefing on the Worldwide Status of
► Vehicle Safety under Self-Certification p. 26 Automated Vehicle Policies p. 134
► Crash Safety of Hybrid- and Electric Vehicles ► Introduction to Artificial Intelligence and
p. 22 Machine Learning for Advanced Driver
► Euro NCAP Update p. 27 Assistance Systems and Automated Driving
► NCAP - New Car Assessment Programs Functions p. 136
p. 30 ► Scenario-, Simulation- and Data-based
► Product Liability in the Automobile Industry Development, Validation and Safeguarding
p. 73 of Automated Driving Functions p. 137
► Briefing on the Worldwide Status ► PraxisConference Safety Assist p. 133
of Automated Vehicle Policies p. 134 ► Automotive Safety Summit Shanghai p. 13
► Automotive Safety Summit Shanghai p. 13 ► SafetyUpDate p. 15
► SafetyUpDate p. 15 ► NCAP - New Car Assessment Programs
► Introduction to Passive Safety p. 16 p. 30
► PraxisConference Safety Assist p. 133
Materials
Car Bodies ► Design of Composite Structures p. 172
► Crashworthy and Lightweight Car ► Material Models of Composites p. 173
Body Design p. 75 ► Material Models of Metals p. 174
► Robust Design and Stochastics for Car ► Material Models of Plastics and Foams
Body Development p. 168 p. 175
► Automotive Safety Summit Shanghai p. 13 ► Crashworthy and Lightweight Car Body
► Introduction to Passive Safety p. 16 Design p. 75
► Lightweight Design Summit p. 166 ► Automotive CAE Grand Challenge p. 162
► Lightweight Design Summit p. 166
Interiors
► Knee Mapping Workshop p. 40
► Head Impact on Vehicle Interiors p. 97
► Whiplash Testing and Evaluation p. 108
Haven’t found what you need?

Get in touch with us!  +49-6023-964060
7
Table of Contents
4 SafetyWissen Navigator 73 Seminar: Product Liability in the Automobile

6 Seminar Guide Industry
10 Preface 74 Seminar: Static Vehicle Safety Tests in
12 In-house Seminars Automotive Development
75 Seminar: Crashworthy and Lightweight Car Body
Passive Safety Design « NEW
13 Conference: Automotive Safety Summit Shnaghai 76 SafetyWissen: Roof Crush
14 Conference: SafetyWeek 78 SafetyWissen: FMVSS 208
15 Conference: SafetyUpDate 79 Seminar: Development of Frontal Restraint
16 Seminar: Introduction to Passive Safety Systems
17 Seminar: Safety of Commercial Vehicles 80 SafetyWissen: Protection Criteria for Frontal
Impact Tests
18 Seminar: International Safety and Crash-Test
Regulations 82 Seminar: Early Increase of Design Maturity of
Restraint System Components
19 SafetyWissen: Crash-Regulations: Europe, United
Nations, USA, China and India 83 SafetyWissen: Frontal Impact Protection Criteria
Compared
20 SafetyWissen: Rules and Regulations on
Occupant Protection 85 SafetyWissen: Safety Requirements for Rear
Seats and Restraint Systems
22 Seminar: Crash Safety of Hybrid and Electric
Vehicles 86 Seminar: Rear Seat Occupant Protection in
Frontal Impact
24 SafetyWissen: FMVSS 305: Safety Requirements
for Electric Vehicles 87 Seminar: Crash-Sensing and Intelligent Restraint
Systems
25 SafetyWissen: UNECE: Safety Requirements for
Electric Vehicles 88 SafetyWissen: Side Impact
26 Seminar: Vehicle Safety under Self-Certification: 90 SafetyWissen: Seat Adjustments for Side Impact
Tests
27 Conference: Euro NCAP UpDate 2020
92 Seminar: Side Impact - Requirements and
28 SafetyWissen: NCAP-Tests
Development Strategies
30 Seminar: NCAP - New Car Assessment Programs
93 SafetyWissen: Side Impact Protection Criteria
32 SafetyWissen: Euro NCAP / ANCAP: MPDB Compared
Frontal Impact
94 SafetyWissen: FMVSS 226, CMVSS 226 - Ejection
38 Seminar: Euro NCAP MPDB Frontal Crash Mitigation
Workshop
96 SafetyWissen: Head Impact on Vehicle Interiors
39 SafetyWissen: Euro NCAP / ANCAP Frontal
97 Seminar: Head Impact on Vehicle Interiors:
Impact
FMVSS 201 and UN R21
40 Seminar: Knee Mapping Workshop:
98 SafetyWissen: Test Procedures and Protection
41 SafetyWissen: Euro NCAP / ANCAP Side Impact Criteria for Pedestrian Protection
42 SafetyWissen: Euro NCAP / ANCAP Far Side 99 Conference: PraxisConferenc Pedestrian
45 SafetyWissen: Euro NCAP / ANCAP Protection
Rescue, Extrication & Safety Assessment « NEW 100 SafetyWissen: Pedestrian Protection
46 SafetyWissen: Euro NCAP / ANCAP 2020 - 2023 102 SafetyWissen: Euro NCAP / ANCAP Pedestrian
48 SafetyWissen: U.S. NCAP Protection: Head and Leg Impact Grid Method
52 SafetyWissen: IIHS Rating 104 Seminar: Pedestrian Protection - Development
57 SafetyWissen: Latin NCAP Strategies
61 SafetyWissen: ASEAN NCAP 105 SafetyWissen: Whiplash Requirements Front
62 SafetyWissen: C-NCAP Seats
65 SafetyWissen: JNCAP 106 SafetyWissen: Euro NCAP / ANCAP Whiplash
68 SafetyWissen: KNCAP Assessment
72 SafetyWissen: Bharat NCAP 107 SafetyWissen: Static Geometry Assessment by
IIWPG / IIHS
8
Table of Contents
108 Seminar: Whiplash Testing and Evaluation in Rear 142 SafetyWissen: Test of ESC Systems
Impacts 143 SafetyWissen: Euro NCAP / ANCAP Test Method
109 SafetyWissen: Child Occupant Protection Euro for AEB VRU-Pedestrian
NCAP / ANCAP 146 SafetyWissen: Euro NCAP / ANCAP Test Method
110 SafetyWissen: Child Occupant Protection Latin for AEB VRU-Cyclist
NCAP 149 SafetyWissen: Test Method for AEB PTW « NEW
110 SafetyWissen: Child Occupant Protection ASEAN 150 SafetyWissen: Test Method for LSS PTW « NEW
NCAP 152 SafetyWissen: Euro NCAP / ANCAP AEB Car-to-
111 SafetyWissen: Child Occupant Protection KNCAP Car
112 SafetyWissen: RCAR Insurance Tests 155 SafetyWissen: Euro NCAP / ANCAP LSS
113 SafetyWissen: UNECE Vehicle Classification 157 SafetyWissen: IIHS AEB / Front Crash Prevention
157 SafetyWissen: IIHS AEB Pedestrian « NEW
Dummy & Crash Test
158 SafetyWissen: U.S. NCAP CIB
114 Conference: SafetyTesting 158 SafetyWissen: U.S. NCAP FCW
116 Seminar: Introduction to Data Acquisition in 159 SafetyWissen: U.S. NCAP RAB
Safety Testing
160 SafetyWissen: C-NCAP Active Safety Rating
117 Seminar: Practical Seminar on Biofidelic PRIMUS-
Dummy Engineering & Simulation
118 SafetyWissen: Current Dummy Landscape
162 Conference: CAE Grand Challenge
120 SafetyWissen: THOR 50 % Male
164 Conference: Human Modeling
122 SafetyWissen: Dummies: Weights, Dimensions
165 Seminar: Model Based Head Injury Criteria
and Calibration
166 Conference: Lightweight Design Summit
123 Seminars: Dummy-Trainings
168 Seminar: Robust Design - Vehicle Development
124 SafetyWissen: Impactors for Pedestrian
under Uncertainty
Protection
169 Seminar: Interior Development – Fundamentals,
126 Seminar: Pedestrian Protection - Test Procedures
Materials, Design, Manufacturing
126 Seminars: Pedestrian Protection Workshops
170 Seminar: Structural Optimization in Automotive
Active Safety Design – Theory and Application
171 Seminar: Improving Efficiency and Reducing Risk
127 Seminar: Introduction to Active Safety of Vehicles in CAE Driven Product Development
128 SafetyWissen: NCAP Tests for Active Safety and 172 Seminar: Design of Composite Structures
Driver Assistance
173 Seminar: Material Models of Composites for
132 SafetyWissen: NCAP Assistance System Rating Crash Simulation
Matrix « NEW
174 Seminar: Material Models of Metals for Crash
133 Conference: PraxisConference Safety Assist « Simulation
NEW
175 Seminar: Material Models of Plastics and Foams
134 Seminar: Briefing on the Worldwide Status for Crash Simulation
of Automated Vehicle Policies
176 Seminar: Modeling of Joints in Crash Simulation
136 Seminar: Introduction to Artificial Intelligence and
177 Seminar: Introduction to the Python
Machine Learning for ADAS and AD Functions «
Programming Language
NEW
178 Seminar: Python based Machine Learning
137 Seminar: Scenario-, Simulation- and Data-based
with Automotive Applications « NEW
Development, Validation and Safeguarding of
Automated Driving Functions « NEW 179 SafetyWissen: Important Abbreviations
138 SafetyWissen: Levels of Driving Automation 182 Terms & Conditions
140 Seminar: NCAP - New Car Assessment Programs: 183 Index
141 Conference: SafetyLighting 185 Seminar Calendar
141 Conference: Auto[nom]Mobil
9
carhs.training
Do not take vehicle safety for granted

Never before have automobiles been safer than today. 60 years of research and devel- SAFETY
opment have given our cars a remarkable degree of passive safety.
COMPANION
What does that mean? It means that inside a modern car, in the event of an accident SafetyWissen on
corresponding to the majority of accidents, we are safe from serious injuries. The engi- 85 pages
neering challenge is to convert the kinetic energy of even the most severe accident More than 150
situations in such a way that the human being is not exposed to loads beyond his or seminars & events
her biomechanical limits.
Have we done enough? The clear answer is: No. There are still far too many deaths
and serious injuries on the roads of Germany, Europe and the whole world.
What is necessary? Unfortunately, there is not the one approach that could prevent the tragedy of 1.3 million deaths
worldwide. In the meantime, the voices that gave autonomous cars this role have also fallen silent.
Rather, many approaches are needed, that are also strongly focusing on regional conditions and adapt to ever chang-
ing boundary conditions.
The integration of active and passive safety has the potential to master future challenges such as an ageing population
and alternative seating positions in highly automated vehicles with solutions.
However, it will still need requirements on the part of legislation and consumer protection organizations. These are
particularly necessary in the developing markets in Asia, Africa and South America in order to implement the existing
know-how of the developed countries as quickly as possible.
We support you in the implementation through our attractive training programs consisting of seminars, hands-on
conferences and events. We cover the entire range of vehicle safety: from passive safety to accident prevention and
safety in automated and autonomous driving.
In addition to the offers in the SafetyCompanion, we are also available to you for individual training, e. g. at your
premises. Take advantage of our experience and the expertise of our trainers to achieve your training goals.
Now is the best time for your company and your employees to use the current changes in the automotive industry as
an opportunity to develop new skills. We are happy to support you.
For the whole team of carhs.training
Rainer Hoffmann Ralf Reuter

President & CEO Executive Vice President
10
carhs.training
Seminars at carhs.training - Your Benefits
Free parking for seminar attendees

In the carhs TrainingCenter in Alzenau, there are enough free parking spaces for our course partici-
pants. So you don't have to plan any time for searching for a parking space and can start your course
in a relaxed way.
Free use of the charging station

You can use our charging station for electric vehicles free of charge during your course attendance
at the carhs TrainingCenter in Alzenau. Two 11 kW type-2 charging stations are available are at your
disposal.
Seminar materials on paper & as PDF file

You will receive the seminar documents from us both as a ring binder for taking notes during
the course and as a PDF file for storage on your computer. You can also bring your computer
with you to the course and work directly in the PDF file.
Fair cancellation policy

We know that sometimes something interferes. Therefore you can cancel your seminar reg-
istration free of charge until 4 weeks before the course and until 2 weeks before the course
only a lump sum of 100 Euro will be charged. You can send a substitute participant at any time.
So you can register early for your seminar of choice without any risk and benefit from the
→ early bird rates.
Early bird rates reduce your costs

Early registrations give us and the course participants planning security. We return the favour
with a significantly lower early booking price for both seminars and conferences.
All-round catering during the seminar

You don't have to bring anything: During the seminar you will be provided with snacks, fresh
fruit and drinks in the breaks and we invite you to lunch with all course participants and train-
ers - this is the opportunity to network.
Small group sizes for maximum learning success

Our courses take place in small group sizes to ensure optimal interaction with the trainers and
between students.
And WiFi?
Of course, WiFi is also available free of charge at the carhs TrainingCenter in Alzenau. How-
ever, we recommend that you not be distracted while attending the seminar. But that is of
course your choice.
11
InhouseSeminars
In-house Seminars
Seminars at your site - efficient, flexible and customized
Are you looking for an individual and customized training for your employees?
Most of the seminars from our training program can also be booked as in-house seminars in English or German language.
Whether on your company site or at another venue of your choice, the scale of our in-house seminars is tailored to your
needs.
Your advantages
You retain full cost control. We offer attractive fixed prices for our
in-house seminars, depending on the number of participants and the
related service. Many of our customers have integrated
Even for a small number of participants you can save a lot of money our in-house seminars into their
compared to the individual booking of seminars. Additionally, there company's training program.
are no costs for travel and time of your employees.
We respect your target dates as far as possible – also upon short
Take advantage of this offer, too! We
notice in „urgent cases“. will be pleased to prepare you an
You benefit from our professional organization and the top-quality
individual offer.
seminar manuals.
Our lecturers answer your individual questions.
Even if you are interested in very specific questions – we are looking
for a qualified lecturer and develop the seminar.
References
ACTS, AUDI, Autoform, AZOS, Bentley Motors, Bertrandt, BMW, Bosch, Brose, CATARC, Continental, CSI, Daimler, Dalphimetal,
Delphi, Dura Automotive, EDAG, Faurecia, Ford, F.S. Fehrer Automotive, Global NCAP, Grammer, HAITEC, Honda, IAV, IABG,
IDIADA, IEE, JCI, IVM, Key Safety Systems, LEAR, Magna, Mahindra & Mahindra, MBtech, MESSRING, MGA, Opel, Open Air
Systems, PATAC, P+Z, SAIC, SMP, SMSC, SEAT, Siemens, TAKATA, TASS, Tata, TECOSIM, TRW, TTTech, Valeo, VIF, Visteon,
Volkswagen, ZF
Attractive prices
With reference to our regular seminar fees we offer attractive discounts on our in-house seminars:
1 Day Seminar 2 Day Seminar

Discount for the Discount for the
30 % 5th - 8th Participant 50 % 5th - 8th Participant
70 % 13 - 16 Participant
th th
75 % 13th - 16th Participant
80 % from the 21 Participant
st
85 % from the 21st Participant
Your contacts at carhs.training
Dr. Dirk Ulrich Sofia Antoniadou

+49-6023-96 40 - 66 +49-6023-96 40 - 76
[email protected] [email protected]
12
Passive Safety
Safety Technologies for the intelligent,

autonomous and electrified Automobile
of the Future.
The »Automotive Safety Summit Shanghai« is attracting more than 500 automotive
safety experts from China and beyond to discuss the latest requirements and innova-
tions in active and passive safety. Accompanied by a comprehensive trade show with
the worldwide vendors in development technologies and services, the summit is the
leading event for everyone involved in automotive safety. The 2020 event will focus
on automotive safety in the context of current Megatrends: NEV, ADAS and AD.
Join »Automotive Safety Summit Shanghai« on July 16 – 17, 2020 at the Kerry Hotel
in Pudong, Shanghai, China.
Keynotes from international experts, presentations on requirements and innovations,
the latest developments in testing and simulation for active and passive systems will
make this event a true highlight for every decision maker and engineer in the fields
of active and passive safety. With the rapid rise of New Energy Vehicles (EV, PHEV
and FCV), new challenges are surfacing for the safety community. The »Automotive
Safety Summit Shanghai« is setting a focal point on Safety of New Energy Vehicles,
discussing requirements, technologies and validation aspects for safety of NEVs.
The event will have dedicated sessions on the following topics:
Safety of new energy vehicles
Global legal and consumer requirements
Pedestrian safety
Autonomous emergency braking
Safety testing and simulation
Safety in autonomous driving
Who should attend?

»Automotive Safety Summit Shanghai« is addressing decision makers and engineers
at all stages of the development phase, managers during the conceptual phase who
need to understand upcoming global requirements, design engineers, testing and
simulation specialists.
DATE 16.-17. July 2020

FACTS
HOMEPAGE www.carhs.de/safetysummit
VENUE Shanghai, China
LANGUAGE English / Chinese with simultaneous translation
13
Passive Safety
Supporting automotive development engineers to further

improve automotive safety, that is the essence of SafetyWeek.
In a unique combination of knowledge congress, events and exhibition, SafetyWeek offers
participants and visitors the opportunity, to bring their expertise up-to-date and to learn
about the latest developments and technologies in product development and product
verification.
In 2020 SafetyWeek will feature numerous highlights:
The knowledge congress SafetyUpDate+active with the most current updates on
requirements and solutions in active and passive safety.  page 15
The SafetyLighting with all news regarding the safety ratings and regulations for
automotive headlights.  page 141
The SafetyTesting+active with the innovations from the Leaders in Testing and
Simulation of components and systems in active and passive safety.  page 114
Auto[nom]Mobil, the expert forum on safe urban mobility  page 141
The accompanying exhibition SafetyExpo, the meeting point for suppliers and
decision makers in automotive safety.
SAFETYTESTING
SAFETYUPDATE
Who should attend?

SafetyWeek is the meeting point for everyone involved in vehicle safety. This includes
developers as well as test and simulation engineers from OEMs and suppliers, manu-
facturers of test systems, representatives of governments and consumer protection
organizations and researchers from universities and research institutes.
DATE 12.-14. May 2020

FACTS
HOMEPAGE www.carhs.de/safetyweek
VENUE VCC Vogel Convention Center, Würzburg
LANGUAGE German with translation into English
PRICE from 890 EUR (single day)
14
Passive Safety
SAFETYUPDATE
The concept is familiar: To keep software up-to-date you regularly make an
update. The same is true for automotive safety engineering: To keep yourself
up-to-date you have to attend the SafetyUpDate on a regular basis. Here you
get a comprehensive overview of all relevant news in automotive safety.
Active + Passive Safety = SafetyUpDate+active

The SafetyUpDate reflects the close integration of active and passive safety and
combines both topics in one event. General topics such as the NCAP consumer
tests are dealt with in plenary presentations, whereas specific topics such as
testing are presented in parallel session on active respectively passive safety.
Conference Topics include:

Regulations for active and passive safety
NCAP consumer protection tests
Development tools: Test & simulation
Development strategies & solutions
Biomechanics & accident research
From Experts for Experts

The speakers are leading experts from government agencies, consumer protec-
tion organizations, industry and universities. We consider it important that the
UpDate presentations are product-neutral and practical.
Meeting Point: Expert Dialog

In addition to the presentations the SafetyUpDate encourages the communi-
cation among experts. After the presentations the speakers are available for
discussions at the MeetingPoint.
Who should attend?

The SafetyUpDate is aimed at automotive developers, who are interested in
active or passive vehicle safety and want to bring their knowledge up-to-date.
In addition to the knowledge update, SafetyUpDate offers excellent opportuni-
ties to build and maintain contacts in the safety community.
DATE 13.-14. May 2020 15.-16. September 2020

FACTS
HOMEPAGE www.carhs.de/update www.carhs.de/gsu
VENUE VCC Vogel Convention Center, Würzburg Technische Universität Graz
LANGUAGE German with translation into English German with translation into English
PRICE 1.490,- EUR till 15.04.2020, thereafter 1.750,- EUR 1.490,- EUR till 18.08.2020, thereafter 1.750,- EUR
15
Passive Safety
Introduction to Passive Safety of Vehicles
Course Description Who should attend?

Ever increasing requirements regarding vehicle safety have led The seminar addresses everybody who wants to obtain an up-
to rapid developments, with major innovations in the field of to-date overview of this wide area. It is suited for novices in the
Active and Passive Safety. Especially legal requirements in the field of Passive Safety of Vehicles such as university graduates,
USA (FMVSS 208, 214), the consumer information tests U.S. career changers, project assistants, internal service providers,
NCAP, Euro NCAP and IIHS, as well as pedestrian protection but also for highly qualified technicians from the crash-test lab.
should be mentioned here. So far an end of this development Course Contents
is not in sight. The seminar provides an introduction to Passive Introduction to vehicle safety
Safety of Vehicles. Passive Safety is about initiatives and legal Overview active and passive safety
provisions for the limitation of injuries following an accident. Crash physics
All important topics are covered in the seminar, from accident Accident research
statistics and injury-biomechanics, which are decisive parts of General accident research
accident research, to the crash-rules and regulations that are Classifications & statistics
derived from the latter, and also to consumer information-tests Biomechanics
with protection criteria and test procedures, and eventually to Human anatomy
crash tests, where the compliance with the compulsory limits Injury mechanisms, injury criteria
is tested and proven in test procedures. Specific attention is Dummy technology
given to dummies, with which the potential loads on a person Dummy family
in an accident can be measured. Finally the basic principles of Crash testing
occupant protection are explained, and the components of Crash test systems and components
occupant protection systems, respectively restraint-systems Test methods
in motor vehicles such as airbags, belt-system, steering wheel, Crash rules and regulations
seat, interior, stiff passenger compartment and others, as well Institutions
as their increasingly complex interaction, also in terms of new Rules and regulations
systems, will be discussed. NCAP tests
Insurance tests (IIHS, RCAR, C-IASI, ...)
Course Objectives Protection principles, occupant protection systems
It is the primary objective of this seminar to communicate an Protection principles of passive safety
understanding for the entire field of Passive Safety with all its Occupant protection systems
facets and correlations, but also for its limits and trends. In the Passenger compartment, interior with steering wheel and
seminar you are going to learn about and understand the most steering column, seat
important topics and can then judge their importance for your OOP, pre crash, post crash, sensor system, vehicle body
work. With the extensive, up-to-date documentation you obtain Optimization of restraint systems, adaptive systems
a valuable and unique reference book for your daily work. Integrated safety
Rainer Hoffmann (carhs.training gmbh)

Instructor
has been involved in automotive safety throughout his

career. After graduating from Wayne State University, he joined Porsche as a research associate in passive safety.
Mr. Hoffmann advanced safety simulation during his subsequent tenure at ESI Group where he introduced new
techniques like airbag simulation, numerical airbag folding and FE dummy modeling. As the head of the simulation
department of PARS (now Continental Safety Engineering), Mr. Hoffmann led the R&D efforts for some of the first
series production side airbag developments. In 1994 Mr. Hoffmann founded EASi Engineering GmbH, which in
2006 was renamed to carhs GmbH. He has authored numerous technical papers and has been granted German
and international patents in the automotive safety field.
DATE COURSE ID VENUE DURATION PRICE LANGUAGE

Dates
19.-20.02.2020 17/3540 Alzenau 2 Days 1.340,- EUR till 22.01.2020, thereafter 1.590,- EUR
17.-18.06.2020 17/3542 Landsberg am Lech 2 Days 1.340,- EUR till 20.05.2020, thereafter 1.590,- EUR
01.-02.09.2020 17/3543 Tappenbeck 2 Days 1.340,- EUR till 04.08.2020, thereafter 1.590,- EUR
16
Passive Safety
Safety of Commercial Vehicles

Freight transport has increased by more than 50 % within 15 The seminar is focused on specialists and experts from the
years. An end of this trend is not foreseeable. Forecasts pre- passenger car and commercial vehicle sector, engineers and
dict that a further increase of up to 80 % over the next 10 years technicians from calculation and testing, project engineers
will occur. Accompanied by this, vehicle safety in commercial and managers, who want to get an overview of the require-
vehicles has been increasingly coming into focus for several ments and technological solutions for the development of
years and initial successes have already been achieved. For safety-relevant systems for commercial vehicles and the
example, the number of accident victims of heavy commercial resulting conclusions to provide compatibility with other
vehicle accidents has fallen by around 35 % since the turn of road users.
the millennium. Current adjustments in UN Regulations and
European legislation on active and passive commercial vehicle Course Contents
safety also go hand in hand with development requirements Requirements for commercial vehicle development
that go far beyond the previous level. An important step Vehicle classes and types for commercial vehicles
towards improving active safety is, for example, the adop- Design of heavy commercial vehicles
tion of UN regulations UN R130 and UN R131, which have Drivers in the development of commercial vehicles
introduced the introduction of Advanced Emergency Braking Measures for passive safety
Systems (AEBS) and Lane Departure Warning (LDW) since Overview of regulations and test methods for passive
1 November 2015 for all heavy commercial vehicles. Both commercial vehicle safety
Effects of the regulations on vehicle design
systems have great potential for avoiding frontal collisions,
Technological feasibility
accidents with oncoming traffic and rollover accidents or at Protection potential and limits of passive safety measures
least for reducing the consequences of accidents. Activities Measures for active safety
are currently underway to further tighten the UN R131 and Overview of regulations and test methods for active
to introduce a regulation on Blind Spot Information Systems commercial vehicle safety
(Turning assistance). However, the design of direct and indi- Effects of the regulations on vehicle design
rect fields of vision (e.g. also via cameras), the cab structure, Technological feasibility
load securing and underride protection systems are still of Protection potential and limits of active safety measures
major importance with regard to commercial vehicle safety. Development strategies
Energy management
In this context, among other things, the regulation UN R29 on
Structural design for passive safety
the crash behavior of the cab structure and the UN R58.03 on Compatibility considerations
the rear underrun protection are of central importance. Solution approaches for conflicting objectives
Simulation of driving sequences in active safety
Course Objectives
In this seminar you will get an overview of the requirements
and regulations of different vehicle classes and types in the
commercial vehicle sector. There is a consideration of today's
legal requirements in the areas of passive and in particular
active vehicle safety. Based on the requirement profile, the
current state-of-the-art as well as current trends are shown.
Prof. Dr. Harald Bachem (Ostfalia University of Applied Sciences) has been in charge of
Instructor
teaching and research in vehicle safety at the Ostfalia University of Applied Sciences since 2011. Prior to
joining the university he held various management positions in industry where he was in charge of develop-
ment and testing of vehicle safety functions. His last management position was head of cab body development
at MAN Truck & Bus AG. Prof. Bachem is chairman of the Wolfsburg Institute for Research, Development and
Technology Transfer e. V.

Date
20.10.2020 158/3534 Alzenau 1 Day 790,- EUR till 22.09.2020, thereafter 940,- EUR
17
Passive Safety
International Safety and Crash-Test Regulations:

Current Status and Future Developments
Since the 1960's, the regulation of vehicle safety performance This seminar should be of interest to anyone involved with
has had a major impact on vehicle and system design. As auto- meeting and anticipating legal requirements for vehicle
motive manufacturing has evolved into an integrated global safety performance across international markets. The course
system, understanding and anticipating legal requirements provides a compact review of changes in passive safety
has become an immense challenge. Regulators collaborate requirements and current priorities across the international
and diverge in how they address road-safety policy goals. regulatory community. Moreover, the course provides knowl-
Regulatory changes in a single market can translate into global edge critical to understanding differences in the way regula-
customer requirements. And these requirements are continu- tors establish and enforce these legal requirements.
ously evolving. In a compact program, this two-day seminar Course Contents
provides a worldwide update on the passive safety landscape, History of safety regulation and development of legal
covering local, national, regional, and international policy and regimes (e.g., self-certification, type approval, product
rulemaking developments. The first segment of the seminar liability, in-use surveillance)
focuses on regulatory institutions and processes. By under- Regulatory agencies and rulemaking processes (e.g., UN,
standing the regulatory environment, including the trend European Union, U.S. NHTSA, etc.)
towards an integrated global regulatory system, businesses Regulatory drivers and priorities
can better prepare for changes that impact competitiveness Types and purposes of regulations (UN Regulations, GTR,
and customer satisfaction. The second segment applies this FMVSS, EU Regulations and Directives, etc.)
knowledge to current and future regulatory requirements. Developments in crashworthiness and occupant
The seminar covers crashworthiness (frontal, side, rear impact, protection requirements (frontal impact, side impact,
etc.) as well as pedestrian protection and new technologies. pole-side impact, full width barrier, offset deformable
Course Objectives barrier, mobile barrier, etc.)
This course informs participants of recent developments Vulnerable road user (VRU) protection (e.g., pedestrian
and discussions within the global regulatory community safety, cyclist safety)
concerning passive safety. The seminar explores differences Safety of new propulsion technologies (electric vehicles,
in regulatory systems and philosophies, in compliance and hydrogen fuel-cells, minimum vehicle noise levels)
enforcement, and in the forces behind the regulation of Passive safety implications of new safety technologies
vehicle safety. The course provides participants with a broad (e.g., emergency call systems, collision avoidance, VRU
understanding current regulatory directions and guidance on detection, automated driving)
how to follow, and even influence, future requirements.
John Creamer (GlobalAutoRegs.com) is the founder of GlobalAutoRegs.com and a partner in The

Instructors
Potomac Alliance, a Washington-based international regulatory affairs consultancy. In his client advisory role,
Mr. Creamer is regularly involved with meetings of the UN World Forum for the Harmonization of Vehicle Re-
gulations (WP.29). Previously, he has held positions with the US International Trade Commission and the Motor
& Equipment Manufacturers Association (representing the US automotive supplier industry), as the represen-
tative of the US auto parts industry in Japan, and with TRW Inc. (a leading global automotive safety systems
supplier).
Dr. Thomas Kinsky (Humanetics Europe GmbH) completed his studies in automotive engineering
at the TU Dresden in 1991 and received his doctorate at the TU Graz in 2015. From 1991 to 1995 he worked as
an officially certified expert at TÜV Rheinland and then took over the management of the vehicle construction
department at a small medium-sized company. From 1999 to 2018 he was employed at Opel Automobile
GmbH in the area of vehicle regulations. Most recently, as a senior expert, he was responsible for the de-
velopment of legislation on passive vehicle safety and represented Opel in discussions with authorities and
associations. He has been Director Business Development at Humanetics Europe GmbH since 2018. In this role
he is Humanetics' representative for all topics regarding dummy development as well as for the requirements
of passive and active safety.

Dates
18
SAFETY
WISSEN
UPDATE
Crash-Regulations: Europe, United Nations, USA, China and India

Instrument Panel Side Windows Interior Roof Headrests
UN R21, 32, 33 UN R43, GTR 6 UN R12, 21, 43, GTR 6 US FMVSS 216, 216a UN R17, 25, GTR 7
US FMVSS 201 US FMVSS 205, 226 US FMVSS 201, 203, 204, 205 CN GB 26134-2010 US FMVSS 202a
IN IS 15223 CN GB 11552-2009 CN GB 11550-2009, GB 15083-2006
IN IS 15223, AIS 096 IN IS 15546
Windscreeen
UN R43, GTR 6 Rollover
US FMVSS 205, 212, 219 UN R44
IN IS 15804 US FMVSS 201, 216, 216a, 301
Rear Impact
Pedestrian Protection UN
US
R17, 25, 32, 34, 42, 58
FMVSS 202a, 207,
EU EG/78/2009, EG/631/2009
UN R127, GTR 9
301, 581
CN GB 11550-2009, GB
CN GB/T 24550-2009
IN AIS 100
18296-2001 20072-2006
IN AIS 101
y
Seat Belts
Wissen b UN R14, 16, 17
Safety
US FMVSS 208, 209, 210
CN GB 14166-2013, GB 14167-
2013, 15083-2006
Frontal Impact IN IS 15139, 15140
UN R12, 14, 16, 33, 34, 94, 137
US FMVSS 203, 204, 208, 209, Bumper Steering Side Impact Seats Doors
210, 301
CN GB 11551-2014 , 11557-2011 ,
UN
US
R42
FMVSS 581
Wheel UN
US
R95, 135, GTR 14
FMVSS 214
UN
US
R16, 17, 21, 44, 129, 145
FMVSS 201, 202a, 207, 213, 225
UN
US
R11, GTR 1
FMVSS 206
14166-2013, 14167-2013
UN R12
CN GB 17354-1998 US FMVSS 203, 204 CN GB 20071-2006, CN GB 11550-2009, 14166-2013, CN GB 15743-1995,
GB/T 20913-2007 IN IS 15901 GB/T 37337-2019 15083-2006, 27887-2011 15086-2013
IN IS 15139, 15140, AIS 096, 098
CN GB 11557-2011
IN AIS 099 IN IS 15546, 15139, 15532, AIS 072 IN IS 14225
IN IS 11939, AIS 096
THE AUTOMOTIVE RESEARCH

ASSOCIATION OF INDIA
PASSIVE SAFETY LABORATORY
Partner for Safer Mobility
ISO 17025 India’s premier automotive

Accredited Test Labs test agency since 1966
Comprehensive passive safety test facilities – ®

crash test facility, advanced sled test facility,
pedestrian protection test facility
Advanced test tools such as FLEX-PLI, BioRID, P & Q Series
Child dummies, HD High Speed Cameras,
: [email protected] | [email protected]
EV & HEV Crash Test Facility WWW
: www.araiindia.com
19
SAFETY
WISSEN
UPDATE
Rules and Regulations on Occupant Protection

Full Width Frontal Offset Frontal
0° / ODB
± 30° 40 %
0
o
0° / ± 5° 0° / ± 5° 32-40  mm
FMVSS 208
FMVSS 208
200
 0o
56 km/h 56 km/h 32-40 km/h 40 km/h
USA
km/h
H III H III H III H III H III H III H III H III H III H III
50 % 50 % 5% 5% 5% 5% 50 % 50 % 5% 5%
ODB
40 %
0o
50 km/h  mm
200
0o
UN R1371
UN R94
56 km/h
Europe
H III H III
50 % 5% H III H III
50 % 50 %
ODB
40 %
0o
50 km/h  mm
200
 0o
56 km/h
Art. 18
Japan
Art 18
H III H III
50 % 5% H III H III
50 % 50 %
ODB
GB/T 20913-2007 40 %
GB 11551-2014
0o
50 km/h  mm
200
 0o
56 km/h
China
H III H III
50 % 50 % H III H III
50 % 50 %
ODB
40 %
 mm
200
 0o
AIS-098
56 km/h
India
H III H III
50 % 50 %
0o
KMVSS 102-3
South Korea
48,3 / 502
H III H III
50 % 50 %
5 %2
ODB
40 %
0o
48 km/h  mm
0o
ADR 69/00
ADR 73/00
200
Australia

56 km/h
H III H III
50 % 50 % H III H III
50 % 50 %
1
Mandatory as part of the EU type approval for new types from July 6, 2022, for new registrations from July 7, 2024.
2
From September 2020
20
SAFETY
WISSEN
UPDATE

Ground
 clearance of the lower edge of the deformable barrier
Side Barrier Side Pole Pedestrian Rear Head Impact Rollover
0-32
ES-2 re km/h
54 SID IIs /
km Roof Crush:
FMVSS 214
FMVSS 214 75°

27° /h ES-2 re
FMVSS 202a FMVSS 216a
48 km/h FMVSS 201
254 mm FMVSS 301 Ejection Mitigation:
MDB, 1368 kg Pole FMVSS 226
SID IIs
32
 mm ES-2 WS 50 % km/h
300
75°
UN R1351

R (EC) 78/2009
UN R95
50 km/h R (EC) 631/2009 UN R34 UN R21

90° 254 mm
Pole
UN R127
MDB EEVC,
950 kg
32
ES-2  mm km/h WS 50 %
300
 75°
Art. 18
Art. 18
50 km/h Article 18 Article 22-4 Article 20

90° 254 mm
MDB EEVC, Pole
950 kg
32
GB/T 37337-2019
GB 20071-2006
 mm ES-2 WS 50 % / km/h
300

ES-2 re 75°
Roof Crush:
50 km/h GB/T 24550-2009 GB 20072-2006 GB11552-2009
90° 254 mm GB26134-2010
MDB EEVC, Pole
950 kg
ES-1/
ES-2  mm
300

AIS-099
50 km/h AIS-100 AIS-101 IS15223

90°
MDB EEVC,
950 kg
32
ES-1/
km/h
KMVSS 102-42
 mm ES-2 WS 50 %
KMVSS 102
300
 75°
50 km/h KMVSS 102-2 KMVSS 88

90° 254 mm
MDB EEVC, Pole
950 kg
32
ES-2  mm km/h WS 50 %
300
ADR 72/00
ADR 85/00
 75°
50 km/h ADR 21
90° 254 mm
MDB EEVC, Pole
950 kg
1
Mandatory as part of the EU type approval for new types from July 6, 2022, for new registrations from July 7, 2024.
2
From September 2020
21
Passive Safety
Crash Safety of Hybrid and Electric Vehicles

During recent years, electric vehicles have achieved an The seminar addresses development and research engineers
ever-increasing importance for the automotive market. as well technicians in the fields of testing and engineering with
A compliance of future restrictions for CO2 emissions will not electric vehicles. Due to its current relevance the course suits
be possible without electrified power trains. All mayor OEM young professionals as well as experienced engineers who
offer an increasing variety of hybrid vehicles (HEV), plug-in want to deepen their knowledge in this field.
hybrid vehicles (PHEV) and pure electric vehicles (BEV). Also a
first offer of fuel cell electric vehicles (FCEV) is in the market. Course Contents
In 2018 nearly 2 million electrified vehicles (BEV and PHEV) Overview alternative drive systems: hybrid, electric
were sold worldwide. For 2020 more than 5 million will be vehicles, fuel cell, gas vehicles
expected. The breakthrough of the automotive electrifica- Challenges for vehicle safety
tion is evident. Nevertheless, several challenges for vehicle Legal requirements and standards, safety requirements
safety arise with new these technologies. Electric shock risks for real-world accidents
on high-voltages systems, fire hazards in case of lithium-ion Safety of high voltage systems
batteries and risks of rupture in case of gas tanks are the Battery safety
most important issues here. For every mode of drive, specific Gas tank safety
drive components and their particular safety requirements Fuel cell safety
are described. In addition to common rules and standards, Structural safety
specific needs based on real-life accidents are being dis- Safety concepts
cussed. For all relevant vehicle components the respective Rescuing, recovering and towing of electric vehicles
safety requirements, safety concepts and exemplary safety
initiatives will be discussed. The state of the art concerning
test standards, verification methods and possibilities for
virtual safety will be shown. Future trends will be presented
with the help of current research projects and results. Practi-
cal experience of rescuing, recovering and towing of electric
vehicles complete the spectrum of accident safety.
Course Objectives
Participants will get an overview about automotive safety of
electric vehicles and will learn the special challenges and solu-
tions which come along. Participants will be able to apply test
methods and safeguarding concepts and to pursue develop-
ment strategies in a target-oriented way.
Rainer Justen (Mercedes-Benz AG) has 30 years of experience in the field of vehicle safety. After his
Instructor
studies in mechanical engineering with a focus on automotive engineering he started his career in the auto-
motive development at Daimler AG in 1987. Several career milestones in the fields of vehicle safety, project
management, safety concepts and active safety / driver assistance systems made him an expert on all relevant
topics of automotive safety. Since 2008 he is working in the field of safety for alternative drive systems. Rainer
Justen is author of numerous publications and papers on this topic. In 2015 Rainer Justen received the SAE
Automotive Safety Award for his work on the Safety of Li-Ion Batteries in Electric Vehicles from the American
Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE).

Dates
22
DTC Dynamic Test Center AG
Your partner in vehicle and aircraft safety
Test track
- Modification tests
- Vehicle dynamics analysis
- Noise measurements
- Brake tests
- Analysis of driver assistance systems
Crash test facilities

- Static and dynamic component tests
- Pedestrian protection tests
- Sled tests
- Complete vehicle crash tests
NEW: ECE-R100 Certification of batteries!

- Vibrationtests
- Thermal shock- and cycle tests
- Mechanical integrity tests
- Fire resistance tests
DTC Dynamic Test Center AG

CH-2537 Vauffelin
www.dtc-ag.ch
( +41 32 321 66 00
SAFETY
WISSEN
UPDATE
FMVSS 305: Safety Requirements for Electric Vehicles

Scope:
Cars, busses, trucks with a GVWR of 4536 kg or less that use electrical components with working voltages higher than 60 volts
direct current (VDC) or 30 volts alternating current (VAC), and whose speed attainable is more than 40 km/h.
Post-crash Requirements:
Under the test conditions described below (impact test and subsequent static rollover)
max. 5 litres of electrolyte may spill from the batteries,
there shall be no evidence of electrolyte leakage into the passenger compartments,
all components of the electric energy storage / conversion system must be anchored to the vehicle,
no battery system component that is located outside the passenger compartment shall enter the passenger compartment,
each HV source in the vehicle must meet one of the 3 following electrical safety requirements
(1) electrical isolation must be greater than or equal to:
500 ohms/V for an AC HV source,
100 ohms/V for an AC HV source if it is conductively connected to a DC HV source, but only if the AC HV source meets the physical
barrier protection requirements specified in the first 3 sub-items of (3)
100 ohms/V for all DC HV sources,
(2) the voltage level of the HV source (Vb, V1, V2) must be ≤ 30 VAC for AC components or 60 VDC for DC components.
(3) physical barrier protection against electric shock shall be demonstrated by meeting the following conditions:
the HV source meets protection degree IPXXB
resistance between exposed conductive parts of the electrical protection barrier (EPB) of the HV source and the electrical chassis is
< 0.1 ohms
resistance between an exposed conductive part of the EPB of the HV source and any other simultaneously reachable exposed
conductive parts of EPBs within 2.5 meters of it must be < 0.2 ohms
voltage between exposed conductive parts of the EPB of the HV source and the electrical chassis is ≤ 30 VAC or 60 VDC
voltage between an exposed conductive part of the EPB of the HV source and any other simultaneously reachable exposed conductive
parts of EPBs within 2.5 meters of it must be ≤ 30 VAC or 60 VDC
Docket No. NHTSA-2019-0009
Test Conditions:
Frontal impact against a rigid barrier at 48 km/h TP-305-01
rigid Barrier
0- 48 km/h
0° / ± 30°
Rear moving barrier impact at 80 km/h (FMVSS 301)

70 %
0-80 km/h
1368 kg
Side moving deformable barrier impact at 54 km/h (FMVSS 214)
%
50
0 - 54 km/h
1368 kg
5%
Post-impact test static rollover in 90 degree steps
24
SAFETY
WISSEN
UPDATE
UNECE: Safety Requirements for Electric Vehicles
Extension of UN R94 / R95:

UN R94, 03 Series, Supplement 1

R94 R95
After crash tests according to UN R94 and R95 vehicles with a high voltage electrical powertrain ( > 60 V DC or > 30 V AC) must
meet the following requirements:
1. Protection against Electrical Shock
at least one of the four criteria specified below shall be met: Electrical Chassis
Absence of high voltage:
Motor assembly V2 REESS assembly
The voltages Vb, V1 and V2 shall be High Voltage Bus
≤ 30 V AC or ≤ 60 V DC :
Traction Sytem
Motor Vb REESS
V1
Low electrical energy: Electrical Chassis
The total energy (TE) on the high voltage buses shall < 2.0 J.
Electrical Chassis
Prior to the impact a switch S1 and a known discharge resistor Re
is connected in parallel to the relevant capacitance . Motor assembly REESS assembly
Not earlier than 5 s and not later than 60 s after impact S1 shall High Voltage Bus
be closed while the voltage Vb and the current Ie are recorded. S1

From this TE is caluclated as follows: Vb
th Motor
Re
REESS
TE = ∫ Vb × Ie dt Ie
tc
with tc = time of closing S1

th = time when voltage drops below 60 V DC
Electrical Chassis
Physical protection:
For protection against direct contact with high voltage live parts, the protection IPXXB shall be provided.
Isolation resistance:
If the AC HV buses and the DC high voltage buses are galvanically isolated from each other, isolation resistance between the HV bus and
the electrical chassis shall be ≥ 100 Ω/V of the working voltage for DC buses, and ≥ 500 Ω/V of the working voltage for AC buses.
If the AC HV buses and the DC HV buses are galvanically connected isolation resistance between the HV bus and the electrical chassis shall
be ≥ 500 Ω/V of the working voltage. (if the protection IPXXB is satisfied for all AC HV buses or the AC voltage is ≤ 30 V after the vehicle
impact, the isolation resistance shall be Ri ≥ 100 Ohm/V)
2. Electrolyte Spillage
In the period from the impact until 30 minutes after no electrolyte from the REESS (Rechargeable Electrical Energy Storage
System) shall spill into the passenger compartment and no more than 7 % of electrolyte shall spill from the REESS.
3. REESS Retention
REESS located inside the passenger compartment shall remain in the location in which they are installed and REESS components
shall remain inside REESS boundaries. No part of any REESS that is located outside the passenger compartment for electric safety
assessment shall enter the passenger compartment during or after the impact test.
UN R100:
M and N class vehicles with a maximum speed > 25 km/h must also comply with UN R100 02 series.
25
Passive Safety
Vehicle Safety under Self-Certification:

Principles, Obligations, Enforcement and Remedies
Course Description Course Contents
When looking at regulatory requirements across different mar- Background and origins of self-certification
kets, it's common to think in terms of technical specifications, Players and processes in U.S. rulemaking
checking for differences in test procedures and performance Principles of U.S. safety compliance and enforcement
criteria. However, failure to consider how the regulations are Role of product liability laws
used can be a fatal mistake because safety authorities differ in Role of Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards (FMVSS)
how they apply and enforce their requirements. This seminar NHTSA and FMVSS compliance
looks at the self-certification compliance and enforcement NHTSA and safety monitoring
system which focuses heavily on monitoring the performance Non-regulatory methods to ensure safety
of vehicles in use. Compliance with the legal standards is only Safety defects and motor vehicle recalls
one part of a much larger, more complex system requiring the Manufacturer roles and responsibilities
assurance of safety throughout the lifetime of every vehicle on Outlook for U.S. safety policies
the road. Manufacturers must have systems in place to detect
possible safety concerns regardless of whether they relate to
compliance with specific standards and must communicate
continuously with safety authorities or run the risk of damag-
ing recalls that can place the company in peril.
Course Objectives
This seminar provides a review of self-certification compliance
and enforcement mechanisms toward helping manufacturers
avoid expensive recalls, costly penalties, and lost reputation.
Who should attend?

The seminar is aimed at employees from the development
departments of automobile manufacturers and suppliers who
develop vehicles for the U.S. market as well as all employees
in the areas of product strategy, sales and warranty and defect
management for the U.S. market.
Images: NHTSA

Instructor
Mr. Creamer is regularly involved with meetings of the UN World Forum for the Harmonization of Vehicle
Regulations (WP.29). Previously, he has held positions with the US International Trade Commission and the
Motor & Equipment Manufacturers Association (representing the US automotive supplier industry), as the
representative of the US auto parts industry in Japan, and with TRW Inc. (a leading global automotive safety
systems supplier).

Date
26
Passive Safety
EuroNCAP
Euro NCAP UpDate
UpDate 20202020
Get ready for Euro NCAP‘s latest rating revision!
Image: Thatcham Research
The Road Map 2025 systematically expands and updates all areas of the Euro NCAP rating.
After a series of new and changed assessment procedures had already been implemented in 2020,
many innovations are scheduled for 2022. At the Euro NCAP UpDate, experts from the respective
working groups provide detailed information on the current status of these new procedures:
Find out the current state of discussion on the upcoming protocols.

Take advantage of the discussion with the experts active in the Euro NCAP working groups.
Contents
Roadmap 2025
AEB/LSS Car-to-Powered Two Wheelers Who should attend?
New Car-to-Car AEB scenarios (Junction & Crossing, Head-on) The Euro NCAP UpDate is suited for
Automatic Emergency Steering AES everybody who wants to be prepared
New test method for pedestrian and cyclist impact for Euro NCAP's upcoming requirements.
(new leg impactor aPLI and extended head impact zone)
Rescue, Extrication & Safety
Child Presence Detection
Driver Monitoring
Virtual Testing
Scenario based assessment
#TestingAutomation
Assessment of automated driving functions
Field reports on the current test procedures
DATE 15.-16. December 2020

FACTS
HOMEPAGE www.carhs.de/euroncap
VENUE Frankfurt am Main
LANGUAGE
PRICE 1.490,- EUR till 17.11.2020, thereafter 1.750,- EUR
27
SAFETY
WISSEN
UPDATE
NCAP-Tests in Europe, America and Australia

Items written in italics are not part of the overall rating 2020 2021 2022 2023 date of implementation unknown
Euro NCAP / ANCAP U.S. NCAP IIHS Latin NCAP
0o
50 km/h
0o
56 km/h
Get familiar with all NCAP tests in just 2 days with
Full Width
our seminar:
H III H III H III H III NCAP - New Car Assessment Programs:
5% 5% THOR 5%
H III 50 % H III Tests, Assessment Methods, Ratings
5% 5% learn more on  page 30
MPDB 1400 kg
90 km
OMDB, 2486 kg ODB SOB 25 % ODB
0°, 50 % R=150 mm
15°, 35 % 40 % 40 %
50 km/h /h
ODB / SOB
 mm 0  mm
 mm
150
 0o
200
 0o
mm 0o 200
 0o
50 km/h 64 km/h 64 km/h 64 km/h
THOR H III THOR THOR H III H III H III H III H III

50 % 50 % 50 % 50 % 50 % 50 % 50 % 50 % 50 %
Q6 Q10 Q3 Q1.5
 mm
300
WS

50 %  mm
279
ES-2 re  mm  mm
 WS 379
 300

AE-MDB, 62 50 % SID IIs ES-2
km
1400 kg 27° /h MDB IIHS MDB EEVC
MDB
60 km/h 55 km/h 50 km/h 50 km/h

90° 90°
90°
Q10 Q6 MDB, SID IIs 950 kg
1368 kg SID IIs Q1.5 Q3
Far Side Occupant Protection
32
WS 50 % km/h 32
75° SID IIS km/h ES-2 29
WS 50 % 75° km/h
90°
Pole
254 mm
Pole 254 mm
Pole 254 mm
Pole
Far Side Occupant Protection
Rollover
SSF Roof Crush
Flex PLI, aPLI Flex PLI

Flex PLI
Pedestrian
Upper Legfom Upper Legfom

Upper Legform
Headforms Headforms AEB Pedestrian
Headforms
AEB/AES VRU Ped., Cyclist, PTW AEB Pedestrian
AEB VRU
AEB Reverse Pedestrian Rear Automatic Braking
Whiplash Child Safety
Frontal MPDB Frontal ODB

LATCH (Lower Anchors and
Side MDB Side MDB
Tethers for Children)
CRS - Installation CRS - Installation
Booster Seat Rating
Veh. Based Assessment, COPD Veh. Based Assessment
Static
Static Front / Rear Static
Dynamic (1 Pulse)
Dynamic (2 Pulses) Dynamic (1 Pulse)
AEB City
SBR, SAS, AEB, LSS, AEB, AEB, FCW SBR, ESC, SAS, BSD, LSS,
Other
FCW, LDW, AEB, DBS,

Occupant Status, AES, Rescue, Headlights AEB, eCall, Rescue Sheet,
BSD, Headlights
AD Low Speed Bumper Rear Impact: UN R32
 page 32  page 48  page 52  page 57

28
SAFETY
WISSEN
UPDATE
NCAP-Tests in Asia
Items written in italics are not part of the overall rating 2020 2021 2022 2023
JNCAP C-NCAP C-IASI KNCAP ASEAN NCAP
0o 0o 0o
55 km/h 50 km/h 56 km/h
Full Width
H III H III H III H III H III H III

5% 50 % 50 % 50 % 5% 5%
H III Q3 H III
5% 5%
MPDB 1400 kg SOB 25 %

ODB ODB ODB ODB
0°, 50 % R=150 mm
40 % 40 % 40 % 40 %
50 km/h
0
ODB / SOB
 mm  mm  mm
200
 0
o  mm
200
 0o
 mm
150
 0o mm 0 o 200
 0
o 200
 0o
64 km/h 64 km/h 50 km/h 64 km/h 64 km/h 64 km/h
H III H III H III THOR H III H III H III H III H III H III
50 % 50 % 50 % 50 % 5% 50 % 50 % 50 % 50 % 50 %
H III H III H III Q10 Q6 Q10 Q1.5 Q3
5% 5% 5%
MPDB MPDB/SO/OMDB
 mm
350
WS  mm
300
WS
WS 300
 mm

50 %  mm
379

50 %  mm
300
50 %  AE-MDB,

SID IIs AE-MDB, ES-2

AE-MDB, 1400 kg 1400 kg

MDB IIHS MDB EEVC
1300 kg
MDB
50 km/h 50 km/h 60 km/h 50 km/h

55 km/h 90° 90°
90° 90°
90°
SID IIs ES-2 Q10 Q6 950 kg
SID IIs Q3 Q1.5
Far Side Occupant Protection Far Side Occ. Prot.
32 32
WS 50 % km/h WS 50 % km/h
75° 75°
Pole
254 mm 254 mm
Pole Pole
Rollover
Curtain Airbag Roof Crush SSF
Flex PLI, aPLI

Pedestrian
Flex PLI Flex PLI, aPLI Flex PLI Upper Legform

Flex PLI
Headforms Headforms Upper Legfom Headforms
Headforms
AEB Pedestrian AEB Pedestrian Headforms AEB Pedestrian /
Cyclist
Frontal ODB
Whiplash Child Safety
Q3 in Full Width Frontal

Side MDB
Q10 in MPDB Frontal ODB
CRS Rating CRS - Installation
CRS - Installation Side MDB
Veh. Based Assmt.
CRS Rating CPD
Dynamic Static Static

Dynamic
(1 Pulse) Dynamic (1 Dynamic (1 Pulse)
(1 Pulse)
Rear Seats Dynamic Pulse) Rear Seats Static
SBR, AEB, LSS, Rear SBR, FCW, LDW,

AEB, FCW BST, Rear View,
Other
View, Headlights, ESC, SBR, AEB, FCW, LDW, BSD, SLD, AEB, BSD,
Low Speed AHB, HPT, Safety
eCall, Pedal SLIF, LKA, eCall, V2X, Headlights LKA, RCTA, ISA,
Misapplication Bumper Assist Technologies
Adv. Airbag, AES
 page 65  page 62  page 68  page 61
29
Passive Safety
NCAP - New Car Assessment Programs:

Tests, Assessment Methods, Ratings
Course Description Focus active safety: Here the focus is on active safety
In 1979 the first New Car Assessment Program (NCAP) was systems such as AEB or lane assistance. The tests and
established by NHTSA in the United States. The goal was to assessments for these systems are explained in detail.
motivate competing car manufacturers to enhance the safety Tests for passive safety are only mentioned in as far as
level of their cars beyond the minimum safety standards they are relevant for the overall rating.
defined by regulations. The same approach has been fol-
lowed globally by other organizations (e. g. by Euro NCAP, In both focusses the current overall rating methods are
IIHS, ANCAP, JNCAP, KNCAP, C-NCAP, ...). Euro NCAP which described and explained. In addition to that an outlook is
has been established in 1997 has taken a leading role and given on the roadmaps and future developments of the NCAP
has significantly influenced other countries and regions. The programs.
NCAP programs in many cases are highly dynamic, especially
in comparison with rulemaking activities. In order to reach Who should attend?
the goal to continuously improve the safety level of cars, the The seminar addresses design, simulation, testing and project
requirements need to be permanently adapted to the state engineers as well as managers who want to get a current over-
of technology. Developers in the automotive industry need to view on the global range of NCAP programs with an outlook
know about upcoming changes at an early stage in order to be on upcoming topics and trends from an insider. Depending on
able to design or equip their vehicles accordingly. In this semi- the focus of their work attendees should chose the appropri-
nar attendees get an overview of the organizations in charge ate focus of the seminar.
of the NCAP programs and become familiar with the various
test and assessment methods.
Course Contents
New Car Assessment Programs - overview
NEW U.S. NCAP
The seminar is conducted several times a year with IIHS
changing focuses: Euro NCAP
ANCAP
Focus passive safety: Here the focus is on test and JNCAP
assessment methods for passive safety. Frontal and KNCAP
side impact, whiplash, child protection and pedestrian C-NCAP
protection are discussed in detail. Tests for active safety C-IASI
are only mentioned in as far as they are relevant for the Latin NCAP
overall rating. ASEAN NCAP
Bharat NCAP
Global NCAP
Direktor and Professor Andre Seeck (German Federal Highway Research Institute)
Instructor
is head of the division "Vehicle Technology" with the German Federal Highway Research Institute (BASt). In this
position he is responsible for the preparation of European Safety Regulations. Furthermore he represents the
German Federal Ministry of Transport and Digital Infrastructure in the Board of Directors of Euro NCAP and he
is the chairman of the strategy group on automated driving and of the rating system. These positions enable
him to gain deep insight into current and future developments in vehicle safety. In 2017 NHTSA awarded him
the U. S. Government Special Award of Appreciation.

Dates
30.11.-01.12.2020 164/3580 Alzenau 2 Days 1.340,- EUR till 02.11.2020, thereafter 1.590,- EUR
30
We are passionate
– about your safety
As engineering and technology partner, our passion is to develop safe vehicles

for the mobility of tomorrow, creating efficient solutions with our state-of-the-art
methods and test facilities.
• Functional development of passive, • Sensor selection and integration

active and cooperative systems of new NCAP requirements
• Passenger simulation, crash and • Safety tests (crash tests,
structure computation sled tests, subsystems)
• Active and passive pedestrian protection • and much more besides.
Find out more on www.iav.com

SAFETY
WISSEN
UPDATE
Euro NCAP / ANCAP: MPDB Frontal Impact
Assessment Procedure:
MPDB/XT-ADAC
1. Calculation of points for each measured criterion
( p. 34) ①: 1400 kg
Where a value falls between the higher ② and lower
③ performance limit, the score is calculated by linear
0°, 50 %
interpolation. The maximum score is 4 points. Exceeding 50 km/h
the capping limit ④ leads to loss of all points related to
that tests.
2. Calculation of points for each body region ⑤:  mm
150
The lowest scoring criterion is used to determine the 
performance of each region. 50 km/h
There are four body regions:
Head and neck
Chest and abdomen
Pelvis, femur and knee
Lower leg and foot
THOR Hybrid III
The Modifiers ⑥ are deducted from the body region
3.
score. 50 % 50 %
4. Calculation of point for the test:
For each body region the lowest score of driver ⑦
or passenger ⑧ is used to determine the score. The
Q6 Q10
maximum score for the test is 16 points.
5. When a door opens in the test, a minus one-point
modifier for each opening door will be applied to the
score for that test.
6. The Compatibility assessment ( page 36) comprises:
Homgenity of barrier deformation ⑨
Barrier bottoming out ⑩
Occupant Load Criterion OLC ⑪ Protocols
It is applied as a modifier ⑫ to the total test score. The Testing MPDB Testing Protocol Version 1.1.1
dedcution is limited to 8 points. In 2020 and 2021 the
deduction is halved and limited to 4 points. Assessment Assessment Protocol AOP Version 9.1.1
7. For the overall rating ( page 46) the score of the Dummy Technical Bulletin 026 Version 1.0
MPDB test is scaled by a factor of 0.5, i. e. a maximum of Barrier Technical Bulletin 022 Version 1.2
8 points is available.
Compatibility Technical Bulletin 027 Version 1.1
32
UFO
Ultra Flat Overrunable robot
DRIVING ROBOT
driverless steer & pedal
SUPPORT & SERVICE
crash avoidance & automated testing
FINITE ELEMENT MODELS
crash test simulations
ATDs
Anthropomorphic Test Devices
CALIBRATION EQUIPMENT
dynamic testing equipment & services
SENSORS
evaluation of automotive impact protection
DAS INTEGRATION
Data Acquisition Systems
Humanetics has all of your testing needs covered with an

extensive por tfolio of products and ser vices. Check out
humaneticsatd.com to see the full line-up of advanced
active and passive safety offerings.
SAFETY
WISSEN
UPDATE
⑤ ① ② ③ ④ ⑥
Dummy Region Criteria 4 Points 0 Points Capping Modifiers
Frontal Impact against MPDB with 50 % Overlap @ 50/50 km/h
HIC15 < 500 > 700 > 700 Unstable airbag/steering wheel
Head1 a3ms (g) < 72 > 80 > 80 contact (-1 pt)
SUFEHM/BrIC Monitoring Hazardous airbag deployment
(-1 pt)
My,extension (Nm) < 42 > 57 > 57 Incorrect airbag deployment
Neck Fz,tension (kN) < 2.7 > 3.3 > 3.3 (-1 pt)
Fx,shear (kN) < 1.9 > 3.1 > 3.1 Steering column displ. (-1 pt)
Deflection A-pillar displacement (-2 pt)
Chest < 35 > 60 > 60 Compartment deformed (-1 pt)
Rmax (mm)
Driver: Steering wheel contact (-1 pt)
THOR Abdo- Incorrect airbag deployment (-1 pt)
Deflection (mm) - > 88 -
50 % men Shoulder belt load > 6 kN (-2 pt)
SBL-B AcetabulumCom-
⑦ Pelvis < 3.28 > 4.1 - Incorrect airbag deployment
pression (kN)
(-1 pt)
> 9.07
Femur Axial Force (kN) < 3.8 - Submarining2 (-4 pt)
> 7.56 @ 10 ms
Variable contact (-1 pt)
Displacement Concentrated loading (-1 pt)
Knee <6 > 15 -
(mm)
Tibia Index < 0.4 > 1.3 - Z–displacement of worst pedal
Tibia
Axial Force (kN) <2 >8 - (-1 pt)
x–Displacement Footwell rupture (-1 pt)
Foot < 100 > 200 - Pedal blocking (-1 pt)
pedal (mm)
HIC15 < 500 > 700 > 700
Head1
a3ms (g) < 72 > 80 > 80
My,extension (Nm) < 42 > 57 > 57 Unstable airbag contact (-1 pt)
< 2.7 @ 0 ms > 3.3 @ 0 ms > 3.3 @ 0 ms Hazardous airbag deployment
Fz,tension (kN) < 2.3 @ 35 ms > 2.9 @ 35 ms > 2.9 @ 35 ms (-1 pt)
Neck < 1.1 @ 60 ms > 1.1 @ 60 ms > 1.1 @ 60 ms Incorrect airbag deployment
(-1 pt)
Pas- < 1.9 @ 0 ms > 3.1 @ 0 ms > 3.1 @ 0 ms
senger: Fx,shear (kN) < 1.2 @ 25-35 ms > 1.5 @ 25-35 ms > 1.5 @ 25-35 ms
Hybrid < 1.1 @ 45 ms > 1.1 @ 45 ms > 1.1 @ 45 ms
III 50 % Deflection (mm) < 22 > 42 > 42 Incorrect airbag deploymt. (-1 pt)
⑧ Chest
VC (m/s) < 0.5 > 1.0 > 1.0 Shoulder belt load > 6 kN (-2 pt)
> 9.07
Femur Axial Force(kN) < 3.8 - Variable contact (-1 pt)
> 7.56 @ 10 ms
Concentrated loading (-1 pt)
Displacement Incorrect airbag deployment (-1 pt)
Knee <6 > 15 -
(mm)
Tibia Index < 0.4 > 1.3 -
Tibia
Axial Force(kN) <2 >8 -
For each door that opens during the test a -1 point modifier will be applied to the score of the test.
1
If there is no hard contact (i. e. ares, peak < 80 g and no other evidence of hard contact) a score of 4 points is awarded.
2
When any of the two iliac forces drops within 1 ms and when the submarining is confirmed on the high speed film.
34
Testing is our passion.
ADAC Technik Zentrum Landsberg.
• Central test lab for Europe’s automobile clubs
• Full-scale crash tests, sled tests of car seats and child restraint systems,
comprehensive pedestrian protection tests, vehicle equipment component tests
• Tests of driver assistance and full auto brake systems for the prevention of
rear-end collisions, protection of pedestrians and cyclists, prevention of accidents
at intersections, day and night
• Road accident research in Germany
ADAC e.V. Technik Zentrum

Otto-Lilienthal-Straße 2 | 86899 Landsberg am Lech
T +49 8191 93 86 41 | [email protected] | adac.de/technikzentrum
SAFETY
WISSEN
UPDATE

Compatibility Assessment
Homogenity Assessment based on the Standard Deviation of the post-test Barrier Deformation within the Rating Area of
the PDB Front Face ⑨
Scanning the deformed PDB front and generating a
mesh with a maximum element size of 10 mm from the
resulting point cloud.
Creation of a point grid centered on the undeformed PDB
front with uniform spacings of 20 mm (1400 grid points). 45 % of vehicle width
Projection of the grid points on the mesh and calculation
of the intrusion at each of the points in the rating area.
Calculation of the standard deviation s [mm] of the 200 mm
Rating Area
intrusion (i. e. the deviation from the mean intrusion
within which 68.2 % of the intrusion values fall). 650 mm
Calculation of the homogenity factor h [%]:
for s < 50 mm: h = 0
for 50 mm ≤ s ≤ 150 mm: h = (s - 50 mm) / 100 mm 250 mm
for s > 150 mm: h = 100 %
Bottoming out of the PDB ⑩

A 2 point modifier MBO is applied if a barrier face penetration depth of 630 mm in an area that is larger than 40 mm x 40 mm
occurs.
Calculation of the Occupant Load Criterion OLC ⑪

Determine velocity course of the MPDB by integrating the measured X-acceleration (ax) on the centre of gravity of the
MPDB (filtered with CFC 180):
‫ݒ‬௩ ሺ‫ݐ‬ሻ ൌ න ܽ௫ ሺ‫ݐ‬ሻ݀‫ ݐ‬൅ ‫ݒ‬଴
with v0 = initial velocity of the MPDB.

OLC, t1 and t2 can be calculated with solving the following equation system:
௧ୀ௧భ ௧ୀ௧భ
න ‫ݒ‬଴ ݀‫ ݐ‬െ න ‫ݒ‬௩ ሺ‫ݐ‬ሻ ݀‫ ݐ‬ൌ ͲǤͲ͸ͷ
௧ୀ଴ ௧ୀ଴
௧ୀ௧మ ௧ୀ௧మ
න ൫‫ݒ‬଴ െ ܱ‫ ܥܮ‬ή ሺ‫ ݐ‬െ ‫ݐ‬ଵ ሻ൯ ݀‫ ݐ‬െ න ‫ݒ‬௩ ሺ‫ݐ‬ሻ ݀‫ ݐ‬ൌ ͲǤʹ͵ͷ
௧ୀ௧భ ௧ୀ௧భ
‫ݒ‬଴ െ ܱ‫ ܥܮ‬ή ሺ‫ݐ‬ଶ െ ‫ݐ‬ଵ ሻ ൌ ‫ݒ‬௩ ሺ‫ݐ‬ଶ ሻ
with t1 = end of the free-flight-phase of a virtual dummy on the barrier along a displacement of 65 mm
t2 = end of the restraining-phase of a virtual dummy on the barrier along a displacement of 235 mm after the
free-flight-phase (i. e. a total displacement of 300 mm)
For compatibility assessment OLC shall be converted from SI units into g.
36
SAFETY
WISSEN
Displacement UPDATE
sO Displacement virtual occupant

sV Displacement MPDB
Δs = sO - sV
300 mm
65 mm
t1 t2 time
Velocity
vO Velocity virtual occupant

vV Velocity MPDB
aconst = OLC [g]
time
Calculation of the Compatibility Modifier ⑫

for OLC < 25 g:
MCompat = -2·h - MBO
for 25 g ≤ OLC ≤ 40 g:
MCompat = -2·OLC/15 + 10/3 - h ·((4·OLC/10 - 8) - (2·OLC/15 - 10/3)) - MBO
MCompat is limited to -8 points
for OLC > 40 g:
MCompat = -2 - 6·h - MBO
MCompat is limited to -8 points
in 2020 and 2021 MCompat is multiplied with 0.5 (i. e. MCompat is limited to -4 points)
MCompat is deducted from the total score (max. 16 points) of the MPDB frontal crash
37
Passive Safety
Euro NCAP MPDB Frontal Crash Workshop n

xis Sessio
with Pra
In 2020 Euro NCAP introduced the MPDB (Moving Progressive Overview of the MPDB Test
Deformable Barrier) frontal crash. With this new crash test, Roadmap / schedule
Euro NCAP wants to assess not only the self-protection of vehi- Development of the test and assessment procedure
Current status of the working group
cles, but also partner protection, i. e. compatibility. The new
Integration into the overall rating (scores, modifiers)
test procedure poses a number of challenges: the test with 2
Trolley and barrier
moving objects (vehicle + barrier car) is much more demand- Specifications
ing than a test against the crash block. In addition there is the Test preparation
use of the new THOR dummy. Due to the new compatibility THOR dummy
evaluation, the test evaluation also goes beyond the previous Dummy specifications (build level)
scope. For example, the energy input into the barrier and the Experiences from the round robin test
deformation pattern must be evaluated. The MPDB Work- Praxis: Seating procedure
shop shows the new test procedure from test preparation Injury criteria, limit values, modifiers
Explanation of head injury assessment with SUFEHM
(trolley, barrier and dummy seating). The workshop will be
held at the ADAC Technical Centre in Landsberg, where the Compatibility rating
Compatibility modifier components
new test procedure was developed to a large extent, and will Determining the OLC
ensure the greatest possible practical relevance. Praxis: Evaluation of barrier deformation (barrier scan)
Course Objectives
Image: ADAC
Course participants will become familiar with the practical
preparation, execution and evaluation of the MPDB crash.
ADAC experts will answer questions about the new Euro NCAP
test procedure.
Who should attend?

The workshop is aimed at all those who design vehicles for this
load case or test vehicles to that effect.
Volker Sandner (ADAC Technik Zentrum Landsberg) has been head of the Vehicle Safety De-
Instructor
partment of ADAC, which includes active safety, passive safety and accident research, since 2010. Before that,
from 1999-2007 he was in charge of the construction of ADAC’s crash test lab as a team manager. From 2007-
2010 he lead the Passive Safety Department of ADAC. At Euro NCAP he is a member of the Board of Directors
and chairman of the frontal impact working group. In addition to that he is member of the side impact working
group, the techincal working group and the ratings group of Euro NCAP. He is also lecturer for vehicle safety at
the University of Applied Sciences in Munich.

Dates
38
SAFETY
WISSEN
UPDATE
Euro NCAP / ANCAP Protection Criteria in Frontal Impact

Assessment Protocol Version 9.1.1

Frontal-Impact against Rigid Wall with 100 % overlap @ 50 km/h
HIC15 < 500 > 700 > 700 Unstable airbag/steering wheel
Head1 contact (-1 pt)
a3ms (g) < 72 > 80 > 80 Hazardous airbag deployment
(-1 pt)
My,extension (Nm) < 36 > 49 > 574 Incorrect airbag deployment (-1 pt)
Steering column displacement
Hybrid III Neck2 Fz,tension (kN) < 1.7 > 2.62 > 2.94 (-1 pt)
5% Rear seat: head forward excursi-
Fx,shear (kN) < 1.2 > 1.95 > 2.74 on (-4 pt)
Deflection (mm) < 18 > 42 > 42 Steering wheel contact (-1 pt)
Chest Incorrect airbag deployment (-1 pt)
VC (m/s) < 0.5 > 1.0 > 1.0 Shoulder belt load > 6 kN (-2 pt)
Femur Axial Force (kN) < 2.6 > 6.2 - Submarining3 (-4 pt)
1
If there is no hard contact (i. e. ares, peak < 80 g and no other evidence of hard contact) a score of 4 points is awarded. For the rear
passenger in the rigid wall impact the score is based on a3ms only, if there is no hard contact.
2
For the rear passenger, the neck score is the sum of all three criteria, with the following maximum score per criterion:
Shear 1 point, Tension 1 point, Extension
argosy-half-pg-ad.pdf 2 points
1 19/11/2019 3:32:25 AM
3
When any of the two iliac forces drops within 1 ms and when the submarining is confirmed on the high speed film.
4
Driver only
Certified Crash Euro NCAP, IIHS, C-NCAP, Latin-NCAP,

US-NCAP, J-NCAP, K-NCAP,
Test Barriers ASEAN-NCAP, ANCAP and more
Quality
Lead Time
Pricing
Y
Delivering performance for

passive safety regulations and
consumer tests worldwide
www.argosyinternational.com [email protected] | T: +1 (212) 268 0003
39
Passive Safety
Knee Mapping Workshop:

The Euro NCAP Test Procedure
Euro NCAP plays a leading role among the tests assessing The seminar addresses specialists from the field of crash,
the passive safety of vehicles in Europe. Its influence now engineers and technicians from numerical simulation and
also extends to other countries. Recently the knee impact testing, project engineers and managers who want to have
test procedure within the Euro NCAP frontal impact test a first-hand, up-to-date information and hints on how to
was modified, the goal being a less subjective assessment. avoid knee modifiers in Euro NCAP.
A hard contact or a sharp edge in the knee area implies the
danger for a car manufacturer to be punished with a so- Course Contents
called knee modifier (reduction in points). The knee modi- Overview of Euro NCAP crash tests
fier is the most frequent penalty within the Euro NCAP and Euro NCAP requirements in the knee area
impairs some vehicles' otherwise 5-star ratings. The alloca- Knee modifier, knee mapping test procedure
tion of a knee modifier often is a controversial decision. If a Sled test procedure for knee impact
knee modifier has been allocated by the Euro NCAP inspec- Discussion of the assessment procedure and
tor the car manufacturer has the possibility of proving - by possibilities of interpretation
means of a complex sled test procedure - that the modifier Workshop with analysis of test vehicles, which can be
was not justified. After a short introduction the main focus provided by participants
of the workshop is on the current Euro NCAP assessment Future development of the test procedure
procedure for frontal impact in the knee area (knee map-
ping). The current requirements will be explained in detail,
in particular the knee modifiers 'Variable Contact' and 'Con-
centrated Loading', the areas of inspection and the thresh-
old values. Positive / negative examples will facilitate the
participants' understanding of the requirements and the
assessment procedure. Participants will learn how to avoid
a modifier. The sled test procedure will also be explained
and discussed in detail. In the afternoon a demo vehicle,
which can be provided by participants, will be analyzed.
Volker Sandner, a trained Euro NCAP inspector, can give
valuable hints here. A perspective regarding the future
development of the test procedure will be given at the end
of the seminar.
The workshop was very informative

and relevant. The final analysis of
a test vehicle was very helpful.“
Ray Longbottom
SAIC Motor UK Technical Centre Ltd., UK
Volker Sandner (ADAC Technik Zentrum Landsberg) has been head of the Vehicle Safety De-
Instructor
partment of ADAC, which includes active safety, passive safety and accident research, since 2010. Before that,
from 1999-2007 he was in charge of the construction of ADAC’s crash test lab as a team manager. From 2007-
2010 he lead the Passive Safety Department of ADAC. At Euro NCAP he is a member of the Board of Directors
and chairman of the frontal impact working group. In addition to that he is member of the side impact working
group, the techincal working group and the ratings group of Euro NCAP. He is also lecturer for vehicle safety at
the University of Applied Sciences in Munich.

Date
15.09.2020 57/3624 Landsberg am Lech 1 Day 790,- EUR till 18.08.2020, thereafter 940,- EUR
40
SAFETY
WISSEN
UPDATE
Euro NCAP / ANCAP Protection Criteria in Side Impact


Barrier Side Impact (AE-MDB) @ 60 km/h &
Pole Side Impact @ 32 km/h
HIC15 < 500 > 700 > 700
incorrect airbag deployment
Head1
(-1 point)
a3ms (g) < 72 > 80 > 80 door opening (-1 point/door)
lateral shoulder force > 3.0 kN
World > 50 (MDB)
Chest Deflection (mm) < 28 > 50 (deduction of all chest points)
SID 50 % > 55 (Pole)
VC > 1.0 m/s (deduction of all
Abdo- chest/abdomen points)
Deflection (mm) < 47 > 65 > 65
men head protection device assess-
Pubic Symphysis ment (-4 points)
Pelvis < 1.7 > 2.8 > 2.8
Peak Force (kN)
1
Pole: no sliding scale, only capping if HIC15 > 700 or ares, peak > 80 g or direct head contact with the pole.
Modifier Side Head Protection Device

Inside the ‚Head Protection Device Assessment Zone‘ (green) the head protection system’s coverage is assessed. If the coverage
is insufficient a 4 point modifier is applied the overall pole impact score. Areas outside the Daylight Opening (FMVSS 201) are
excluded from assessment. Seams are not penalized if the un-inflated area is no wider than 15 mm. Any other un-inflated areas
that are no larger than 50 mm in diameter (or equivalent area) are not penalized.
②
82 mm
① r = 82 mm
CoG 95 %
693 mm
594 mm
82 mm 82 mm
H-Point
50 %
52 mm
CoG 5 %
The head protection device (HPD) evaluation zone (green) is defined as a rounded rectangle around the head CoG box (defined
by the head CoGs of the 5 % female and 95 % male occupants) at a distance of 82 mm from the upper and fore/aft edges and 52
mm below the bottom edge. The x-position of the CoG is defined relative to the H-Point of the 50 % male:
Front seats:
① = H-Point(x) + 126 mm - seat travel (5th %ile- 50th %ile)
② = H-Point(x) + 147 mm + seat travel (50th %ile- 95th %ile)
Rear seats:
① = H-Point(x) + 126 mm - remaining seat travel
② = H-Point(x) + 147 mm + remaining seat travel
41
SAFETY
WISSEN
UPDATE
Euro NCAP / ANCAP Far Side Occupant Protection in Side Impacts
Test & Assessment Protocol Version 2.0

Test Procedure
2 sled tests on acceleration based sled rig

WS 75°
Pulses: 50 %
Test 1: AX, SLED = AY, VEHICLE (AE-MDB @ 60 km/h) x 1.035
Test 2: AX, SLED = AY, VEHICLE (Pole @ 32 km/h) x 1.035
BIW mounted with centerline angled 75° towards direction of travel
Spacers (EPP60) fitted in gaps between the struck side and the passenger seat and A X, SLED
the passenger seat and center console
WorldSID 50 % on driver seat
Assessment
Prerequisites:
Structural stability of doors, hinges, roof rail and sill in MDB and pole crash. No opening of doors on struck side in MDB and pole crash.
Total score from MDB and pole crash ≥ 10 points out of 12.
No failure of restraint systems for side impact protection in MDB and pole crash.
Dummy Criteria:
Dummy Region Criteria Max. Points 0 Points Capping
Far Side Occupant Protection Sled Test
HIC15 (with direct contact only) < 500 > 700 > 700
Head
a3ms (g) < 72 > 80 > 80
Upper Neck Tension Fz (kN) < 3.74 > 3.74 -
Upper Neck Lateral Flexion MxOC (Nm) < 162 > 248 -
Upper Neck Extension neg. MyOC (Nm) < 50 > 50 -
World Neck
SID 50 % Lower Neck Tension Fz (kN) < 3.74 > 3.74 -
Lower Neck Lateral Flexion Mx (Nm) < 162 > 248 -
Lower Neck Extension neg. My (Nm)* - > [100]* -
Chest & Chest Lateral Compression (mm) < 28 > 50 > 50

Abdomen Abdomen Lateral Compression (mm) < 47 > 65 > 65
*
Monitoring for 2020/2021
Max Points are depending on Peak Head Excursion and Far Side Countermeasures:
The maximum available points for each body region depends on the amount of head excursion and the availability of a far
side countermeasure.
Peak Head Excursion in Zone
Zone Red*
Capping Orange Yellow Green
Region Countermeasure ≤ 125 mm > 125 mm
with 0 0 2 3 4 4
Head
without 0 0 1 2 4
with 0 4 4 3 4 4
Neck
without 0 1 1 2 4
with 0 0 0 3 4 4
Chest & Abd.
without 0 0 1 2 4
Max Dummy with 0 4 6 9 12 12
Score without 0 1 3 6 12
* score is depending on wether the red excursion line is > 125 mm outboard of the orange excursion line or not
42
Safe Automated Driving
with CARISSMA
Safe Mobility and Electrification

Integrated Safety and Field Detection
Test Methods and Facility Research
Connected Mobility and System Security
HMI and Driver Acceptation
Occupant Monitoring and smart Restrain Systems
www.carissma.eu
SAFETY
WISSEN
UPDATE
Excursion Lines:
Red Line: Maximum post test intrusion of the interior door panel
from AE-MDB (60 km/h) and 75° pole impacts respectively.
Orange Line: Seat centerline of the struck side seat
Yellow Line: 125 mm inboard from struck side seat centerline
Green Line: 250 mm inboard from struck side seat centerline
Excursion Zones:
Capping Zone: Outboard from the Red Line
Red Zone: Between Red Line and Orange Line
Orange Zone: Between Orange Line and Yellow Line
Yellow Zone: Between Yellow Line and Green Line
Green Zone: Inboard from Green Line
Pelvis and Lumbar Spine Modifiers

Pefor-
Criteria mance Modifier
Limit
PSPF (kN) > 2.8
Lumbar Fy (kN) > 2.0 -4 Points applied to the dummy
Lumbar Fz (kN) > 3.5 score for each test
Lumbar Mx (Nm) > 120
Total Score:
The total score (max. 12 from test 1 + 12 from test 2 = 24 points) will be scaled down to a maximum of 4 points and is part
of the AOP score.
Occupant to Occupant Protection:
If the vehicle is equipped with a countermeasure, it must prove that the measure prevents occupant to occupant (O2O)
interaction. This is verfied in the full scale pole side impact (in 2020/2021 alternatively in the MDB impact). This test will be
exectued with an additional WS 50 % dummy on the front passenger seat.
Criteria for O2O head protection:
No exceedance of the head lower performance criteria
No evidence of direct contact between the far side occupants head and any part of the nearside occupant (from 2022 onwards)
For an assymetric countermeasure the OEM must provide evidence that it provides protection in impacts from both sides
Protection must be offered in a protection zone: CoG marking from passenger
B C B
in pole test position
If the countermeasure fails to meet these criteria, the A
total far side score (max. 4 points) will be reduced by 1 point. A = 120 mm
A B = 82 mm
C = Distance between driver
(mid + 20 mm) and passenger
(rearmost) head CoG locations
44
SAFETY
WISSEN
NEW
Euro NCAP / ANCAP

Rescue, Extrication & Safety Assessment
Test & Assessment Protocol Version 1.0
Rescue Sheet
Penalty for not meeting the
Rescue Sheet Requirements requirements
Rescue Sheet availability -2
Rescue Sheet should be provided in PDF format as a unique document i. e. one file per model variant
Rescue Sheet should be no more than four A4 sized pages
Commercial licences and/or exclusive publishing rights may not infringe on the rights of Euro NCAP
and its members to make Rescue Sheets available at no cost to the general public
Rescue Sheets must be supplied in at least the following languages: English, German, French and
Spanish. -1
From 2022: Rescue Sheets must be supplied in at least one of the official languages of each EU
country + UK
Rescue sheet must meet ISO 17840 Part 1 format and should include a summary following ISO
17840 Part 3
Rescue sheet content must be correct (checked in post-crash inspection)
Extrication
Penalty for not meeting the
Extrication Requirements requirements
Automatic Door Locking (ADL): All side doors must be unlocked after frontal crash tests and non-
struck side doors must be unlocked after side crash tests
Post crash side door opening force < 750 N
Post crash hinged side door opening angle ≥ 45°
Post crash sliding side door opening ≥ 500 mm
Electric retracting door handles: After all full scale crash tests, the handles of all side doors must -1
be in the extended/ready to open position or remain in retracted position but allow to be grabbed
nevertheless by the first responder without any tool
Seat belt buckle unlatching force ≤ 60 N on seats occupied during frontal crashes
Seat belt buckle unlatching force on seats occupied during side crashes is monitored in 2020/2021
and will be limited from 2022
Max. total penalties from Rescue Sheet & Extrication -2
Post Crash Technology

Prerequisite for scoring: no penalties for Rescue Sheet requirements
Score for meeting the
Post Crash Technology Requirements requirements
Advanced eCall system providing the likely number of occupants 0.5
Advanced eCall system providing the recent vehicle locations N1 and N2 0.5
Multi Collision Brake (MCB) verified by
destruction-free demonstration of braking caused by the MCB trigger signal 1
documentation showing that the MCB trigger signal is sent during a crash test
Max. total score 2
45
SAFETY
WISSEN
UPDATE
Euro NCAP / ANCAP Rating: 2020 - 2023 Euro NCAP Rating Review 2018 V 1.1
Adult Occupant Protection Child Occupant Protection VRU Protection Safety Assist
2020 2022 2020 2022 2020 2022 2020 2022
2021 2023 2021 2023 2021 2023 2021 2023
max. points max. points max. points max. points
MPDB Frontal Dyn. Tests
Head Impact Occupant Sta-
Impact 8 8 Frontal 16 16 24 18 3 3
tus Monitoring
Full-width Speed Assi-
Dyn. Tests Side Leg Impact
Frontal Impact 8 8 8 8 6 stance Systems 3 3
18
Side impact CRS Upper Leg Lane Support
(MDB) 6 6 Installation 12 12 Impact 6 Systems 4 3
Side Impact Vehicle Based AEB / AES CCR

AEB VRU-Pe
(Pole) 6 6 Assessment 13 13 9 9 (Inter-Urban) 4 3
Side Impact
(Far Side Occu- AEB VRU-Cy AEB Junction
4 4 9 9 2 3
pants MDB & Assist C2C
Pole)
Whiplash Front
AEB Junction
Seats 3 3 6 AEB Head-on 3
Assist PTW
Whiplash Rear
Seats 1 1 LSS PTW 3
Rescue 2 4
max. points (1) 38 40 max. points (1) 49 49 max. points (1) 54 63 max. points (1) 16 18
normalised actual points normalised actual points normalised actual points normalised actual points
score (2) / (1) score (2) / (1) score (2) / (1) score (2) / (1)
weighting (3) 40 % weighting (3) 20 % weighting (3) 20 % weighting (3) 20 %
weighted score (4) (2) x (3) weighted score (4) (2) x (3) weighted score (4) (2) x (3) weighted score (4) (2) x (3)
Balancing: minimum normalised score (2) by box for the respective star rating:
 80 % 80 % 80 % 80 % 60 % 70 % 70 % 70 %
+ + +
 70 % 70 % 70 % 70 % 50 % 60 % 60 % 60 %
 60 % 60 % 60 % 60 % 40 % 50 % 50 % 50 %
 50 % 50 % 50 % 50 % 30 % 40 % 40 % 40 %
 40 % 40 % 40 % 40 % 20 % 30 % 30 % 30 %
Overall score (5) = ∑(4)
The overall score is used only for ranking the results within vehicle categories.
Bold figures indicate changes with respect to the previous year
VSSTR Protocol Version 7.4 Euro NCAP Logo Guidelines

Dual Rating
Euro NCAP issues a base rating for standard equipment only. Fitment rates for safety assist technologies are no longer
considered. Optionally manufacturers of cars that have achieved at least 3 stars can apply for a secondary rating of a model
equipped with an optional safety package that meets a certain market installation rate (an average of 25 % in the first 3 years and of
55 % in the subsequent 3 years). The safety package must be actively promoted by the manufacturer. The safety package must
be available, at least as an option, on all variants in the model range.
46
ENGINEERING AND R&D
FOR THE MOST PRECIOUS
THINGS IN LIFE
We take care of full vehicle safety
Altran is the world leader in engineering and R&D services.

Our Team of Passive Safety experts is your trusted
partner for engineering, simulation and testing services.
Together with our product line Microsys test systems, we
can help you to achieve your development goals faster.
www.altran.com/passivesafety
SAFETY
WISSEN
U.S. NCAP: Tests and Criteria Docket No. NHTSA–2006–26555
Laboratory Test Procedure Oct 2015
0o  mm
279

56 km/h 62 ES-2 re SID IIS 32 km/h
km 75°
/h /
27°
Hybrid III Hybrid III

50 % 5% 55 km/h
Rigid 254 mm Pole
MDB, 1368 kg
SID IIs
45
45
Injury Criteria Injury Risk
44 Curves
44 45
44 45
44 (HIII 5F dummy):
Frontal-Impact against Rigid
Injury Risk Wall
Curves forfor with
Injury Risk Curves for Frontal NCAP
Injury Risk Curves Frontal
Frontal 100 % OverlapInjury
NCAP
NCAP
Injury Risk Curves for Frontal NCAP
@ 56 km/h
Criteria
(HIII 5F dummy):
Risk Curve
(HIII 5F dummy):
(HIII 50M dummy): Injury Criteria (HIII 5F dummy):
Risk Curve
(HIII
(HIII 50M
50M dummy):
dummy):
Dummy
Injury Criteria
HybridRisk
(HIII 50M dummy): III Curve
50 % (Driver) Injury Criteria
Injury Criteria
Hybrid IIIRisk
5Risk
%Curve
(Passenger)
Curve
Injury
Injury Criteria
Criteria Risk
Risk Curve
Curve
Injury Criteria Risk Curve
⎛ ln( HIC 15) − 7.45231 ⎞
HIC ⎛ ln( HIC15) − 7.45231 ⎞
Head
Head(HIC Phead (AIS 3+ ) = Φ ⎜ ⎛ ln( ⎛ ln(
HIC 15)− −7.45231
15) 7.45231
⎟ ⎞ Head Phead (AIS 3+ ) = Φ⎛⎜ ln( HIC15) − 7.45231 ⎞⎟
Head
Head
15 ) Phead(AIS
Phead (AIS3+3)+=) =⎝Φ⎛Φ ⎜ HIC
⎜ln( 15) − 7.45231⎠ ⎞⎞⎟ ⎟ (HIC
0.73998 Head15) Phead (AIS 3+ ) = Φ⎜⎝ ⎛ ln( HIC 0.73998 ⎟⎠ ⎞
(HIC15)(HIC
(HIC)15)
Head Phead (AIS 3+ ) = Φ ⎜⎝ ⎝ 0.73998
0.73998 ⎟⎠ ⎠ (HICHead 15) − 7.45231
15
where Φ = cumulative ⎝ normal 0.73998
distributi on⎠ 15) P (AIS 3 + ) = Φ⎛
⎝ ⎜ HIC
ln( 0.73998
15) −distribution
7.45231 ⎞⎠ ⎟
Pwhere
(HIC15) head Φ = cumulative normal
head (AIS 3+ ) = Φ ⎜ ⎝
Head ⎟⎠
whereΦΦ= =cumulative
where cumulativenormalnormaldistributi
distributionon (HIC
(HIC15) 0.73998
where Φ = cumulative normal distributi on 15) where Φ = cumulative ⎝ 0.73998
normal distribution
⎠
1 where Φ cumulative normal1distribution
=) =
Chest
Chest Pchest _ defl ( AIS
Pchest 3+)3=+) =
( AIS 11 Chest Pchest _where
defl ( AIS
Φ 3=+cumulative normal distribution
1 ChestDefl ) 0.4612
Chest Chest
(deflection in mm)
(deflection
Chest in in mm)
PPchest
chest defl( AIS
_ _defl 3+) = 10.5456−1.568*(1ChestDefl ) 0.4612
(deflection
Chest in mm)
Pchest _ defl ( AIS 3+) = 1 + e10.5456 −1.7212*( 1
_ defl ( AIS 3+ ) =1 + 1e + 10.5456 ) 0.4612
(deflection mm) 10.5456 −1.568*( ChestDefl 0.4612
(Deflection
(deflection in in
mm) mm) e −1.568*( (deflection
ChestDefl )0.4612in mm)
Chest Pchest _ defl ( AIS 3+) =1 + e10.5456 −1.7212*( 1 ChestDefl ) 0.4612
11++ee10.5456−1.568*(ChestDefl(deflection
) Femur in mm) Pchest _ defl ( AIS 3+) =
Chest
e10.5456 1−1.7212*(ChestDefl ) 0.4612
Femur
(deflection
(force ininkN)
Femur
mm) P ( AIS 2+ ) 1= +1 + 10.5456 −1.7212*(ChestDefl ) 0.4612
e e 5.7949−0.7619
1 Femur _ Force
Femur 1 1 (forceFemur
in kN) P ( AIS 2+ ) = 1+
(force Femur
Femur in kN)
(force
in in kN) P ( AIS
P AIS2 + )2 +
( AIS =) = 5.795 − 0.51961Femur Femurin kN) 1
1 + e 5.7949 −0.7619 Femur _ Force
P ( AIS 2+ ) = 1 −10.7619 Femur _ Force
Femur
−1
PP((AIS 22++)) ==1 +11+e+e5.795
(force kN) _ Force (force
(Force ininkN)
(force kN) 5.795
e − 0.5196
5.795 − 0.5196
0.5196 Femur
Femur _ Force
(force in kN)
Femur_ Force
_ Force
Neck Pneck_NijP(AIS3
( AIS 2++ )=) = 1 +5.7949 e 5.7949
0.7619 Femur _ Force
e 1−−1.9688
1 +3.2269
(AIS3+) = 1 + e
1 Nij
Neck P 1
(Nij and
Neck Pneck_Nij (AIS3+) = 1 + e 1
neck_Nij
Pneck_Nij (AIS3 1 tension/compression in 1 + e 3.2269 1−1.9688 Nij
Neck
Neck
(Nij and tension/compression in Pneck_Nij (AIS3 +)+1=)+=e 3.2269 −11.9688 Nij (NijNeck
and Pneck_Nij (AIS3+) =
(AIS3 + ) = 1 Nij
(Nij and tension/compression
Neck in in Pneck_Nij (AIS3+) = 1 +1 +e 3.2269 e 3.2269 −1.9688
−1.9688 NijNij kN) and in
Neck
tension/compression
(Nij Pneck
neck_Nij
_ Tens ( AIS 3+ ) = 3.2269 −1.9688
e −1.9688
1 +3.2269
kN) 3.2269 −1.9688 1 Nij 1 +e e10.958−3.770 1 Nij
Neck _ Tension
kN)
kN) in
Pneck _ Tens ( AIS 3+) = 1 + e 1
(Nij
kN)and
tension/compression in Pneck _ Tens ( AIS 3+) =1 + 1
kN) Pneck _ Tens( AIS
( AIS3+3)+1=)+=e10.9745 − 2.37511Neck _ Tension tension/compression
kN) in
Pneck _ Tens ( AIS 3+) = 1 + e10.958−3.770 1 Neck _ Tension
Neck Pneck
Pneck _ Tens
e10.9745 − 2.375 Neck _ Tension kN) PPneck ( AIS
AIS3 + ) = 10.958−3.7701Neck _ Tension
_ Tens ( AIS 3+) = 1 + 1 +e10.9745
10.9745 − 2.375 Neck _ Tension
− 2.3751Neck _ Tension
_ Tens
neck _ Comp ( 3 + ) = 1 + e
10.958
10.958 −3.770
−3.770 1Neck_ Tension
Neck _ Compression
(Nij and Tension/ Pneck _ Comp ( AIS 3+) = 1 + e
1 1_ Compression Pneck _ Comp ( AIS 3+) =1 1++e e 1 _ Compression
Compression in kN) Pneck _ Comp( AIS
Pneck ( AIS
3+3)+1=)+=e10.9745 − 2.375 Neck
1 Neck _ Compression P52
Pneck
neck=_max
Comp ( AIS(P
imum 1 + e10.958
3+neck_Nij
)= −3.770 Neck
Pneck −_3.770
, 10.958 1 Pneck _ Comp )
Pneck _ Comp
_ Comp ( AIS 3+) = 1 + e10.9745
1 +e10.9745
10.9745 − 2.375
− 2.375 Neck _ Compression P 52
52
neck _ Comp ( AIS 3+ ) =
52 = max imum(Pneck_Nij10.958 1 + e
Tens ,Neck _ Compression
Pneck = max imum(Pneck_Nij
PneckRisk max imum 1 + , Pneck _−Tens
e
(Pneck_Nij
2.375, Neck
Pneck_ _Compression
Comp )
Pneck _ Tens, P, Pneck
Pneck 1 + e , Pneck −3.770
_ Tens , Pneck
Neck _ Comp )
_ Compression
Pneck
Injury = =max imum
Curves (Pfor Side NCAP , P, neck Tens neck _ Comp
Comp )) Pneck = max imum(Pneck_Nij , Pneck _ Tens , Pneck _ Comp ) 53
Pneck = max imum(Pneck_Nij , Pneck _ Tens , Pneck __Comp
neck_Nij _ ) Pneck = max imum(Pneck_Nij , Pneck _ Tens , Pneck _ Comp )
InjuryRisk
Injury
Injury RiskCurves
Risk Curvesfor
Curves forSide
for SideNCAP
Side NCAP
NCAP
(ES-2re 50M dummy):
Overall (ES-2re50M
(ES-2re
(ES-2re 50Mdummy):
50M dummy):
dummy): Pjoint = 1 - (1-Phead) x (1-Pneck) x (1-Pchest) x (1-Pfemur)
Injury Criteria Risk Curve (SID-IIs 5F dummy):
Side Impact (MDB & Pole Test)

InjuryCriteria
Injury
Injury Criteria
Criteria RiskCurve
Risk
Risk Curve
Curve
Injury Criteria Risk Curve
ES-2re 50 % SID-IIs 5 %
Head
⎛ ln(HIC36) − 7.45231 ⎞
(HIC 36)
Head
Head
Head Phead (AIS3+) = Φ⎜⎛ln( ln(HIC36) 7.45231⎞⎟⎞
36)−−7.45231
Head
(HIC3636
(HIC
(HIC )))
36
PPhead
head(AIS3
head Φ⎛⎜⎝⎜ HIC0.73998
(AIS3++))==Φ ⎟⎠⎟ (HIC
Head ⎛ ln( HIC 36) − 7.45231 ⎞
Phead (AIS3+ ) = Φ⎜ ⎟ 53
⎝ ⎝ 0.73998
0.73998 ⎠⎠ 36) ⎝ 0.73998 ⎠
(HIC36) where Φ = cumulativenormal distribution
where Φ
where cumulativenormaldistribution
Φ ==cumulativenormal distribution where Φ = cumulative normal distribution
Chest (SID-IIs 5F dummy):
1
(rib deflection
Chest
Chest in
Chest
Chest Pchest ( AIS 3+) = 11 Pelvis
Injury Criteria
rib deflection 1
Risk Curve
(rib
(rib mm) inin
(ribdeflection
deflection
deflection
(Rib Deflection
in
in PPchest AIS33++))== 1 + e5.3895−0.0919*max.
chest((AIS
(acetabular p pelvis ( AIS 2+) =
mm)
mm)
mm)
1 + e 5.3895− 0.0919*max. ribdeflection
5.3895−0.0919*max. rib deflection
+ iliac force in N)
1 + e 6.3055−0.00094 *F
mm) 1+ e
where F is the sum of acetabular and iliac force
Abdomen (total
1 in the SID − IIs dummy in HIC
⎛ ln( Newtons
36) − 7.45231 ⎞
abdominal
Abdomenforce
Abdomen
Abdomen
Abdomen (totalin
(total
(total
N)force
abdominal forceinin
in Pabdomen ( AIS 3+) = 11−0.002133*(HIC
Head Phead (AIS3+ ) = Φ⎜
0.73998
⎟
PPabdomen AIS33++)) == 1 + e6.04044
abdominal force F ) ⎝ ⎠
abdomen((AIS
abdominal
(Abdominal Force 6.04044 36
N)
N)
N) abdomen 6.04044−−−0.002133* F
0.002133*FF
in N) 1
1+ e
where F =total abdominal + e
force
6.04044
(N) in
0.002133*
ES-2re
where Φ = cumulative normal distribution
whereFFF=total
where
where =totalabdominal
=total abdominalforce
abdominal force(N)
force (N)inin
(N) inES-2re
ES-2re
ES-2re
1 Pelvis
1
Pelvis (Force) Ppelvis ( AIS 3+) = (acetabular p pelvis ( AIS 2+) =
1 + e 11−0.0011*F
7.5969
Pelvis(Force)
Pelvis
Pelvis
Pelvis (Force)
(Force) PPpelvis
pelvis
pelvis(( AIS
AIS 33
++))==
0.0011*FFF
7.5969−−0.0011*
7.5969
+ iliac force in N)
1 + e 6.3055−0.00094 *F
(Force in N) where F is the pubic 11++ee7.5969
force −in0.0011*
the ES - 2re in Newtons where F is the sum of acetabular and iliac force
whereFF isisthe
where the pubic
pubic force
forceininthe
theES
ES--2re in Newtons
2rein Newtons
in the SID − IIs dummy in Newtons
Overall Pjoint = 1 - (1-Phead) x (1-Pchest) x (1-Pabdomen) x (1-Ppelvis) Pjoint = 1 - (1-Phead) x (1-Ppelvis)
48
SAFETY
WISSEN
U.S. NCAP: Injury Risk Curves Hybrid III 50 % ES-2re 50 %

Hybrid III 5 % SID-IIs 5 %
multiple Dummys
40% 40%
35% 35%
30% 30%
Pchest (AIS 3+)

Phead (AIS 3+)
25% 25%
20% 20%
15% 15%
10% 10%
5% 5%
0% 0%
200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60
HIC (15 / 36) Chest Deflection (mm)
40% 40%
35% 35%
30% 30%
Pabdomen/pelvis (AIS 3+)
Pfemur (AIS 2+)
25% 25%
20% 20%
15% 15%
10% 10%
5% 5%
0% 0%
2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 4000 4500 5000 5500 6000 6500
Femur (Force in kN) Abdomen / Pelvis (Force in N)
40% 40%
35% 35%
30% 30%
Pneck_tens/compr (AIS 3+)
Pneck_Nij (AIS 3+)
25% 25%
20% 20%
15% 15%
10% 10%
5%
5%
0%
0%
1,5 2 2,5 3 3,5 4 4,5
0 0,2 0,4 0,6 0,8 1 1,2 1,4
Neck (compression/tension Force in kN) Neck (Nij)
49
SAFETY
WISSEN
U.S. NCAP: Rating Scheme
Frontal Crash Test Side Pole Test Side MDB Test Rollover Test
Driver Passenger Front Seat Front Seat Rear Seat
Injury Criteria Injury Criteria Injury Criteria Injury Criteria Injury Criteria
Probabilty of In- Probabilty of In- Probabilty of In- Probabilty of In- Probabilty of In- Probabilty of
jury (Risk Curves) jury (Risk Curves) jury (Risk Curves) jury (Risk Curves) jury (Risk Curves) Rollover
Pjoint Pjoint Pjoint Pjoint Pjoint Proll
RR*=Pjoint/base** RR*=Pjoint/base** RR*=Pjoint/base** RR*=Pjoint/base** RR*=Pjoint/base** RR*=Proll/base**
Stars Stars
Driver Stars Passenger Stars (20 %) (80 %) Rear Seat Stars
(50 %) (50 %) Front Seat Stars (50 %) Overall Rollover
(50 %) Star Rating
(3/12)
Overall Frontal Star Rating Overall Side Star Rating
(5/12) (4/12)
Vehicle Safety Score (VSS)
*RR = relative risk; **base = baseline risk = 15 %

Rating procedure
Using the Injury Risk Curves on  page 48 and page 49, the risk of a serious injury (AIS 3+) can be calculated from the injury
criteria measured in the crash test. The joint risk for an occupant can be determined using the following formulae:
Frontal Impact: Pjoint = 1 − (1 − Phead ) × (1 − Pneck ) × (1 − Pchest ) × (1 − Pfemur )
Side Impact: Pjoint = 1−(1− Phead) × (1− Pchest) × (1− Pabdomen) × (1− Ppelvis)
This risk is compared to a so called baseline risk which was set to 15 %. This ratio is called relative risk (RR) from which the star
rating is determined using the following table:
RR 0 0.67 1 1.33 2.67
Stars     

The rollover star rating is determined using the following table:
RR(roll) 0 0.67 1.33 2.0 2.67
Stars     

The Vehicle Safety Score (VSS) is calculated as follows: (5/12) × RR(front) + (4/12) × RR(side) + (3/12) × RR(roll). The VSS star rating
is determined using the following table:
VSS 0 0.67 1 1.33 2.67
Stars     

50
Coming Soon:
NEW Sled Testing
Facility to Support New
Vehicle Development North American Independent Test Lab
+1-716-632-7500 | Calspan.com
Flexible | Collaborative | Efficient
Crash Test Facility of the Year
North America’s Most Capable Independent

Crash Test Laboratory
Trusted New Vehicle Development Partner
with Exceptional Resources to
Test to Standards, Proposed Protocols, Customer Requirements
Crash | Sled | Tire Performance Testing

SAFETY
WISSEN
UPDATE
IIHS Rating Testing Protocol Version XVIII (Jul 2017)
Rating Guidelines September 2014
Dummy Region Criteria Good Acceptable Marginal Poor

Frontal Impact against ODB with 40 % Overlap @ 64 km/h
HIC15 ≤ 560 ≤ 700 ≤ 840 > 840
Nij ≤ 0.80 ≤ 1.00 ≤ 1.20 > 1.20

Head
Fz,tension (kN) ≤ 2.6 ≤ 3.3 ≤ 4.0 > 4.0
& Neck
Fz,compression (kN) ≤ 3.2 ≤ 4.0 ≤ 4.8 > 4.8
ares peak (g) Values > 70 result in downgrading
a3ms (g) ≤ 60 ≤ 75 ≤ 90 > 90
Deflection (mm) ≤ 50 ≤ 60 ≤ 75 > 75

H III Chest
50 % Deflection rate (m/s) ≤ 6.6 ≤ 8.2 ≤ 9.8 > 9.8
VC (m/s) ≤ 0.8 ≤ 1.0 ≤ 1.2 > 1.2
Femur Axial Force (kN) ≤ 7.3 @ 0 ms ≤ 9.1 @ 0 ms ≤ 10.9 @ 0 ms > 10.9 @ 0 ms

(Force duration corridors) ≤ 6.1 @ 10 ms ≤ 7.6 @ 10 ms ≤ 9.1 @ 10 ms > 9.1 @ 10 ms
Knee Displacement (mm) ≤ 12 ≤ 15 ≤ 18 > 18
Legs &
Feet TI (upper, lower) ≤ 0.80 ≤ 1.00 ≤ 1.20 > 1.20
Tibia Axial Force (kN) ≤ 4.0 ≤ 6.0 ≤ 8.0 > 8.0
Foot acceleration (g) ≤ 150 ≤ 200 ≤ 260 > 260
Testing Protocol Version V (Dec 2019)

Seat/Head Restraints: Static Assessment ( page 107)
Backset (mm) ≤ 70 ≤ 90 ≤ 110 > 110
Head
HRMD Distance from top of head
& Neck ≤ 60 ≤ 80 ≤ 100 > 100
(mm)
Seat/Head Restraints: Dynamic Assessment

Vector sum of the standardized
shear (FX) and tension (FZ)
< {0.450}2 ≤ {0.825}2 > {0.825}2
values
BioRID Head {FX / 315}2 + {(FZ – 234) / 1131}2
IIg & Neck
Time to head restraint contact (ms) for values > 70 ms the rating is reduced by one level*
T1 acceleration (g) for values > 9.5 the rating is reduced by one level*
* only if both exceed the given level
The overall rating equals the static or dynamic rating, whichever is worse.
Exceptions: If the static rating is „Acceptable“ but the backset is sufficient for a „Good“ rating and the dynamic rating is „Good“ then the overall
rating is also „Good“. If the static rating is „Marginal“ or „Poor“ no dynamic test is made and the overall rating is „Poor“.
52
SAFETY
WISSEN
UPDATE
IIHS Rating Rating Guidelines Nov 2016 Testing Protocol Version X (Jul 2017)

Barrier Side Impact (IIHS MDB) @ 50 km/h
HIC15 ≤ 623 ≤ 779 ≤ 935 > 935
Head/
Fz,tension (kN) ≤ 2.1 ≤ 2.5 ≤ 2.9 > 2.9
Neck
Shoulder deflection (mm) Values > 60 result in downgrading
Ø Rib deflection (mm) ≤ 34 ≤ 42 ≤ 50 > 50

Chest/
Worst Rib deflection (mm) 51 - 55 > 55
Torso
Deflection rate (m/s) ≤ 8.20 ≤ 9.84 ≤ 11.48 > 11.48
VC (m/s) ≤ 1.00 ≤ 1.20 ≤ 1.40 > 1.40

SID-IIs
5% Acetabulum force (kN) ≤ 4.0 ≤ 4.8 ≤ 5.6 > 5.6
Ilium force (kN) ≤ 4.0 ≤ 4.8 ≤ 5.6 > 5.6

Combined acetabulum and
≤ 5.1 ≤ 6.1 ≤ 7.1 > 7.1
ilium force (kN)
Pelvis/
Left Femur A-P force (3 ms clip, kN) ≤ 2.8 ≤ 3.4 ≤ 3.9 > 3.9
Femur Femur L-M force (3 ms clip, kN) ≤ 2.8 ≤ 3.4 ≤ 3.9 > 3.9
Femur A-P bending moment
≤ 254 ≤ 305 ≤ 356 > 356
(3 ms clip, Nm)
Femur L-M bending moment
≤ 254 ≤ 305 ≤ 356 > 356
(3 ms clip, Nm)
Intrusion: B-pillar to driver seat
Structure ≥ 125 ≥ 50 ≥0 <0
centerline distance (mm)
Testing Protocol Version III (July 2016)
Criteria Good Acceptable Marginal Poor

Roof Crush ( page 76)
Stiffness to weight
Fmax / m x g ≥ 4.00 ≥ 3.25 ≥ 2.50 < 2.5
ratio (SWR)
Year TSP Criteria TSP+ Criteria

Crash tests: „Good“ Crash tests: „Good“
Front Crash Prevention & AEB Pedestrian: at Front Crash Prevention & AEB Pedestrian: at least
2020
least „Advanced“ „Advanced“
Headlights: at least „Acceptable“1 Headlights: at least „Acceptable“2
1
at least "Acceptable" headlights need to be available as optional equipment
2
at least "Acceptable" headlights need to be standard equipment
53
SAFETY
WISSEN
IIHS Rating: Small Overlap Testing Protocol Version VI (Jul 2017)
Rating Protocol Version V (Jul 2017)

Frontal Impact against Small Overlap Barrier with 25 % Overlap @ 64 km/h
lower hinge pillar (resultant)
Lower Occupant Compartment
footrest (resultant)
Structure Rating: Intrusions (mm) 
left toepan (resultant) ≤ 150 ≤ 225 ≤ 300 > 300
brake pedal (resultant)
parking brake pedal (resultant)
rocker panel (lateral) ≤ 50 ≤ 100 ≤ 150 > 150
steering column (longitutinal) ≤ 50 ≤ 100 ≤ 150 > 150

Upper Occupant
Compartment
upper hinge pillar (resultant)
upper dash (resultant) ≤ 75 ≤ 125 ≤ 175 > 175
left instrument panel (resultant)
HIC15 ≤ 560 ≤ 700 ≤ 840 > 840
Head Nij ≤ 0.80 ≤ 1.00 ≤ 1.20 > 1.20

& Neck
 Fz,tension (kN) ≤ 2.6 ≤ 3.3 ≤ 4.0 > 4.0
a3ms (g) ≤ 60 ≤ 75 ≤ 90 > 90
Chest/ Deflection (mm) ≤ 50 ≤ 60 ≤ 75 > 75

Torso
H III  Deflection rate (m/s) ≤ 6.6 ≤ 8.2 ≤ 9.8 > 9.8
50 %
VC (m/s) ≤ 0.8 ≤ 1.0 ≤ 1.2 > 1.2
Femur
KTH Injury Risk (%) ≤5 ≤ 15 ≤ 25 > 25

Knee Displacement (mm) ≤ 12 ≤ 15 ≤ 18 > 18
Leg & TI (upper, lower) ≤ 0.80 ≤ 1.00 ≤ 1.20 > 1.20

Foot
 Tibia Axial Force (kN) ≤ 4.0 ≤ 6.0 ≤ 8.0 > 8.0
Foot Acceleration (g) ≤ 150 ≤ 200 ≤ 260 > 260
54
cutting edge
high-speed
imaging pco.dimax cs
on & offboard testing
compact and ruggedized
12-bit
dynamic
range
2128 fps
Full HD resolution
resists
150G
automatic for 11ms
image calibration
pco.de
Safety Engineering at its Best

> Specialist for vehicle safety development
> Development and testing Partner for vehicle and component manufacturers
> Expert in system application and validation for passive and integrated safety
Continental Safety Engineering International GmbH l www.continental-safety-engineering.com

Contact: Uwe Gierath l Tel.: +49 (0) 6023 942 120 l [email protected]
SAFETY
WISSEN
IIHS Rating: Small Overlap

Frontal Impact against Small Overlap Barrier with 25 % Overlap @ 64 km/h
Restraints & Dummy Kinematics Rating
Rating system based on a demerit system Demerits
Frontal Head Protection
Partial frontal airbag interaction 1
Minimal frontal airbag interaction 2
Excessive lateral steering wheel movement (> 100 mm) 1
Two or more head contacts with structure 1
Late deployment or non deployment of frontal airbag automatic Poor
Lateral Head Protection
Side head protection airbag deployment with limited forward coverage 1
No side head protection airbag deployment 2
Excessive head lateral movement 1
Front Chest Protection
Excessive vertical steering wheel movement (> 100 mm) 1
Excessive lateral steering wheel movement (> 150 mm) 1
Occupant containment and miscellaneous
Excessive occupant forward excursion (> 250 mm) 1
Occupant burn risk 1
Seat instability 1
Seat attachment failure automatic Poor
Vehicle door opening automatic Poor
Restraints & Kinematics  Good Acceptable Marginal Poor

Sum of Demerits ≤1 ≤3 ≤5 >5
Small Overlap Overall Rating

Rating system based on a demerit system. Demerits result from the injury, structure and restraints & kinematics ratings.
Component Rating Good Acceptable Marginal Poor
Vehicle Structure Rating  0 2 6 10
Head/Neck Injury Rating  0 2 10 20
Chest Injury Rating  0 2 10 20
Thigh and Hip Injury Rating  0 2 6 10
Leg and Foot Injury Rating  0 1 2 4
Restraints / Kinematics Rating  0 2 6 10
The overall rating depends on the sum of demerits:
Overall Rating Good Acceptable Marginal Poor
Sum of demerits ≤3 ≤9 ≤ 19 > 19
56
SAFETY
WISSEN
NEW
Latin NCAP Rating: 2020 - 2023
Adult Occupant Child Occupant Pedestrian Safety Assist

Protection Protection Protection
2020 - 2020 - 2020 - 2020 2022
2023 2023 2023 2021 2023
max. max. max. max. max.
points points points points points
Offset
16 Dyn. Tests Frontal 16 Head Impact 24 Seat Belt Reminder 10 10
Frontal Impact
Speed Assistance
Side Impact (MDB) 8 Dyn. Tests Side 8 Lower Leg Impact 6 3 3
Systems
CRS
Side Impact (Pole) 8 12 Upper Leg Impact 6 AEB Inter-Urban2 9 9
Installation
Whiplash Front
3 Vehicle Based 13 AEB VRU2 12 ESC 15 15
Seats
Lane Support Syst.
AEB City2 3 3 3
(LDW, LKA, RED)2
Rear End Impact Blind Spot
1 3 3
UN R32 Detection2
Rescue Sheet 1 eCall 2
max. points (1) 40 max. points (1) 49 max. points (1) 48 max. points (1) 43 45
actual actual actual actual actual
normalised score (2) points normalised score (2) points normalised score (2) points1 normalised score (2) points points
/ (1) / (1) / (1) / (1) / (1)
Balancing: minimum normalised score (2) by box for the respective star rating:
 75 % 80 % 40 % 75 %
+ + +
 70 % 65 % 35 % 65 %
2020
 60 % 50 % 30 % 50 %
 50 % 30 % 20 % 40 %
 40 % 15 % 10 % 10 %
 80 % 80 % 50 % 80 %
+ + +
 70 % 70 % 40 % 70 %
2022
 60 % 55 % 30 % 60 %
 50 % 40 % 25 % 50 %
 40 % 20 % 10 % 50 %
1
In 2020 and 2021 the total Pedestrian Protection score is calculated as follows:
(Head score + Upper Leg score + Lower Leg score) x 1.15 + AEB score x 0.55
2
System will be assessed if it is offered in all Latin NCAP markets as option and meets the following fitment rates:
System 2020 2021 2022 2023
AEB City 10 % 10 % 30 % 30 %
AEB VRU 10 % 10 % 30 % 30 %
Protocol Version 1.1.0
AEB Inter-Urban 10 % 10 % 30 % 30 %
BSD + LDW + LKA + RED combined 25 % 35 % 45% 55 %
Bold figures indicate changes with respect to the previous year
57
SAFETY
WISSEN
UPDATE
Latin NCAP Protection Criteria in Frontal Impact

HIC15 < 500 > 700 > 700
a3ms (g) < 72 > 80 > 80 Unstable airbag/steering wheel
contact (-1 pt)
My,extension (Nm) < 42 > 57 > 57
Hazardous airbag deployment
< 2.7 @ 0 ms > 3.3 @ 0 ms > 3.3 @ 0 ms (-1 pt)
Head1,2 Fz,tension (kN) < 2.3 @ 35 ms > 2.9 @ 35 ms > 2.9 @ 35 ms Incorrect airbag deployment
Neck < 1.1 @ 60 ms > 1.1 @ 60 ms > 1.1 @ 60 ms (-1 pt)
Steering column displacement
< 1.9 @ 0 ms > 3.1 @ 0 ms > 3.1 @ 0 ms
(-1 pt)
< 1.2 @ 25-35 > 1.5 @ 25-35 > 1.5 @ 25-35 Passenger head contact w/
Fx,shear (kN)
ms ms ms dashboard (-1 pt)
< 1.1 @ 45 ms > 1.1 @ 45 ms > 1.1 @ 45 ms
A-pillar displacement (-2 pt)
Hybrid III Deflection (mm) < 22 > 42 > 42 Compartment integrity (-1 pt)
50 % Steering wheel contact (-1 pt)
Chest
Incorrect airbag deployment
VC (m/s) < 0.5 > 1.0 > 1.0 (-1 pt)
Shoulder belt load > 6 kN (-2 pt)
> 9.07 -
Axial Force (kN) < 3.8 Variable contact (-1 pt)
> 7.56 @ 10
Femur - Concentrated loading (-1 pt)
ms
Knee Incorrect airbag deployment
Displacement (-1 pt)
<6 >15 -
(mm)
Tibia Index < 0.4 > 1.3 - Z–displacement of worst pedal
Tibia Axial Force (kN) <2 >8 - (-1 pt)
Foot x–Displacement Footwell rupture (-1 pt)
< 100 > 200 - Pedal blocking (-1 pt)
pedal (mm)
door opening (-1 pt/door)
fuel leakage (-1 pt)
1
If there is no hard head contact (i.e. ares, peak < 80 g and no other evidence of hard contact) a score of 4 points is awarded.
If no steering wheel airbag is fitted and HIC15 < 700 and a3ms < 80 g, 2 headform tests according to UN R12 are carried out (hub/
2
spoke junction and rim spoke junction). Assessment is based on the following criteria:
Dummy Region Criteria 2 Points 0 Points Capping

UN R12 HIC15 > 700
6.8 kg Head a3ms (g) < 65 > 80 > 80
headform ares, peak (g) < 80 > 120 > 120
Assessment Protocol AOP 2020 1.1.0

58
P+Z Engineering GmbH
Your development in the best possible hands

The globally active ARRK Engineering Division is a key part of the international ARRK Group which
specialises in all servicesrelating to product development.
With 450 engineers in the CAE & Simulation area, we are one Our crash competence
of the largest companies in Germany specialising in this field.
In our target market of the automotive industry we are involved • Structural crash
in strategic and long-term projects for renowned German • Occupant safety
premium manufacturers.
• Pedestrian protection
We guarantee you a smooth process of
your crash simulation. • Test validation
In the area of passive safety 180 crash experts work in-house • Passive safety concepts
on solutions for our customers. • Robustness evaluation
Our customers benefit here from the extensive expertise of our • Material models
engineers in the field of crash simulation as well as the intensive
networking and cross-sectoral collaboration across the world- • Optimisation & form
wide locations of the ARRK Engineering division. finding methods
ARRK ENGINEERING
Germany I Romania I UK I Japan I China
[email protected] I www.arrk-engineering.com
SAFETY
WISSEN
UPDATE
Latin NCAP Protection Criteria in Side Impact

Barrier Side Impact @ 50 km/h &
HIC15 < 500 > 700 > 700
Head1
a3ms (g) < 72 > 80 > 80 incorrect airbag deployment
(-1 pt)
backplate loading Fy 1.0 ... 4.0
Deflection (mm) < 22 > 42 > 42
kN (0 ... -2 pt)
ES-2 Chest
T12 Fy 1.5 ... 2 kN / Mx 150 ...
VC (m/s) < 0.32 > 1.0 > 1.0
200 Nm (0 ... -2pt)
Abdo- Forcecompression head protection device assess-
< 1.0 > 2.5 > 2.5 ment (-2 pt front, -2 pt rear)
men (kn)
Pubic Symphysis
Pelvis < 3.0 > 6.0 > 6.0
Peak Force (kN)
door opening (-1 pt/door)
fuel leakage (-1 pt)
1
Pole: no sliding scale, only capping if HIC15 > 700 or ares, peak > 80 g or direct head contact with the pole.
Modifier Side Head Protection Device
Inside the ‚Head Protection Device Assessment Zone‘ (green) the head protection system’s coverage is assessed for both front
and rear seats. If the coverage is insufficient a -2 point modifier is applied to the overall AOP score. Areas outside the Daylight
Opening (FMVSS 201) are excluded from assessment. Seams are not penalized if the un-inflated area is no wider than 15 mm.
Any other un-inflated areas that are no larger than 50 mm in diameter (or equivalent area) are not penalized.
②
82 mm
① r = 82 mm
CoG 95 %
693 mm
594 mm
82 mm 82 mm
H-Point
50 %
52 mm
CoG 5 %
The head protection device (HPD) evaluation zone (green) is defined as a rounded rectangle around the head CoG box (defined
by the head CoGs of the 5 % female and 95 % male occupants) at a distance of 82 mm from the upper and fore/aft edges and 52
mm below the bottom edge. The x-position of the CoG is defined relative to the H-Point of the 50 % male:
Front seats:
① = H-Point(x) + 126 mm - seat travel (5th %ile- 50th %ile)
② = H-Point(x) + 147 mm + seat travel (50th %ile- 95th %ile)
Rear seats:
① = H-Point(x) + 126 mm - remaining seat travel
② = H-Point(x) + 147 mm + remaining seat travel
Assessment Protocol AOP 2020 1.1.0
60
SAFETY
WISSEN
UPDATE
ASEAN NCAP Overall Assessment Protocol Version 2.0

Overall Rating 2021 - 2025
Adult Occupant Child Occupant
Safety Assist Motorcyclist Safety
Protection Protection
Offset Frontal Impact 16 Frontal Impact 16 Seat Belt Reminder 6 Blind Spot (BST) 8
Side Impact (MDB) 8 Side Impact 8 ABS / ESC 6 Rear View (ARV) 4
HPT 8 CRS Installation 12 AEB 6 Auto High Beam (AHB) 2
Vehicle-based Assmt. 13 Advanced SATs 3 Pedestrian Protection 2
CPD 2 Advanced MST (2)1
max. points (1) 32 51 21 16
normalized score (2) actual points / (1) actual points / (1) actual points / (1) actual points / (1) Overall
weighting (3) 40 % 20 % 20 % 20 % score (5)
weighted score (4) (2) x (3) (2) x (3) (2) x (3) (2) x (3) ∑(4)
Rating Balancing: minimum normalized score (2) per box required for the respective star rating:
score points score points score points score points
 80 % 25.60 75 % 38.25 70 % 14.70 50 % 8.00
 70 % 22.40 60 % 30.60 50 % 10.50 40 % 6.40
 60 % 19.20 30 % 15.30 40 % 8.40 30 % 4.80
 50 % 16.00 25 % 12.75 30 % 6.30 20 % 3.20
 40 % 12.80 15 % 7.65 20 % 4.20 10 % 1.60
Bonus points do not increase the max. total points
1
Adult Occupant Protection AOP Assessment Protocol Version 2.0

Dummy Region Points Criteria
HIC15 < 500; a3ms < 72 g
My,extension < 42 Nm
4
Fz,tension < 2.7 kN @ 0 ms / < 2.3 kN @ 35 ms / < 1.1 kN @ 60 ms
Fx,shear < 1.9 kN @ 0 ms / < 1.2 kN @ 25 – 35 ms / < 1.1 kN @ 45 ms
Head, Neck
HIC15 > 700; a3ms > 80 g
My,extension > 57 Nm
0
Fz,tension > 3.3 kN @ 0 ms / > 2.9 kN @ 35 ms / > 1.1 kN @ 60 ms
max. 16 points
Fx,shear > 3.1 kN @ 0 ms / > 1.5 kN @ 25 – 35 ms / > 1.1 kN @ 45 ms
H III 50 % 4 Deflection < 22 mm; VC < 0.5 m/s
Chest
front 0 Deflection > 42 mm; VC > 1.0 m/s
Axial Forcecompression < 3.8 kN
Femur, 4
Knee Displacement < 6 mm
Knee
Axial Forcecompression > 9.07 kN @ 0 ms / > 7.56 @ 10 ms
0
Knee Displacement > 15 mm
TI < 0.4; Axial Forcecompression < 2 kN
4
Tibia Pedal rearward displacement < 100 mm
Foot TI > 1.3; Axial Forcecompression > 8 kN
0
Pedal rearward displacement > 200 mm
Barrier Side Impact (MDB) @ 50 km/h

4 HIC36 < 650; a3ms < 72 g
Head
0 HIC36 > 1000; a3ms > 88 g
max. 16 points2
4 Deflection < 22 mm; VC < 0.32 m/s

Chest
0 Deflection > 42 mm; VC > 1.0 m/s
ES-2
4 Forcecompression < 1.0 kN
Abdomen
0 Forcecompression > 2.5 kN
4 PSPF < 3.0 kN
Pelvis
0 PSPF > 6.0 kN
scaled down to 8 points in the overall rating
2
61
SAFETY
WISSEN
C-NCAP Protocol 2018

Frontal Impact with 100 % Overlap @ 50 km/h ❶
5 HIC36 < 650; a3ms < 72 g
Head
0 HIC36 > 1000; a3ms > 88 g
2 Fz,tension < 2.7 kN @ 0 ms / < 2.3 kN @ 35 ms / < 1.1 kN @ 60 ms
Neck
0 Fz,tension > 3.3 kN @ 0 ms / > 2.9 kN @ 35 ms / > 1.1 kN @ 60 ms
H III 50 % Fx,shear > 3.1 kN @ 0 ms / > 1.5 kN @ 25 – 35 ms / > 1.1 kN @ 45 ms
front 5 Deflection < 22 mm; VC < 0.5 m/s
Chest
max. 20 points
Axial Forcecompression < 3.8 kN;
2
Femur Knee Displacement < 6 mm
Knee Axial Forcecompression > 9.07 kN @ 0 ms / > 7.56 @ 10 ms;
0
Knee Displacement > 15 mm
2 TI < 0.4; Axial Forcecompression < 2 kN
Tibia
0 TI > 1.3; Axial Forcecompression > 8 kN
1.6 HIC15 < 500
Head
0 HIC15 > 700
H III 5 % 0.4 Fx,shear < 1200 N; Fz,tension < 1700 N; My,extension < 36 Nm
Neck
rear 0 Fx,shear > 1950 N; Fz,tension > 2620 N; My,extension > 49 Nm
2 Deflection < 23 mm
Chest
0 Deflection > 48 mm
Frontal Impact against ODB with 40 % Overlap @ 64 km/h ❷ SafetyWissen by
HIC36 < 650; a3ms < 72 g

4
Fz,tension < 2.7 kN @ 0 ms / < 2.3 kN @ 35 ms / < 1.1 kN @ 60 ms
Head, Neck
HIC36 > 1000; a3ms > 88 g
0
Fz,tension > 3.3 kN @ 0 ms / > 2.9 kN @ 35 ms / > 1.1 kN @ 60 ms
H III 50 % Fx,shear > 3.1 kN @ 0 ms / > 1.5 kN @ 25 – 35 ms / > 1.1 kN @ 45 ms
front
max. 20 points

Chest
0 Deflection > 50 mm; VC < 1.0 m/s
4 Axial Forcecompression < 3.8 kN; Knee Displacement < 6 mm
Femur
Knee Axial Forcecompression > 9.07 kN @ 0 ms / > 7.56 @ 10 ms; Knee Displacement
0
> 15 mm
4 TI < 0.4; Axial Forcecompression < 2 kN
Tibia
0 TI > 1.3; Axial Forcecompression > 8 kN
2 HIC15 < 500; Fx,shear < 1200 N; Fz,tension < 1700 N; My,extension < 36 Nm
Head, Neck
H III 5 % 0 HIC15 > 700; Fx,shear > 1950 N; Fz,tension > 2620 N; My,extension > 49 Nm
rear 2 Deflection < 23 mm
Chest
62
www.csi-online.de
W E A LW AYS
FOCUS ON
SAFETY
CAE – SIMULATION
csi entwicklungstechnik
CRASH SIMULATION
PEDESTRIAN PROTECTION
O CCU PA N T S A F E TY
STRUCTURAL MECHANICS
OPTIMIZATION
CFD
STIFFNESS/STRENGTH
SAFETY
WISSEN
C-NCAP
Barrier Side Impact (AE-MDB) @ 50 km/h ❸
4 HIC15 < 500; a3ms < 72 g
Head
0 HIC15 > 700; a3ms > 80g
WS 50 Chest
front 0 Deflection > 50 mm; VC > 1.0 m/s; Shoulder Lateral Force > 3.0 kN
Abdomen
max. 20 points
4 PSPF < 1.7 kN
Pelvis
0 PSPF > 2.8 kN
1 HIC15 < 500
Head
0 HIC15 > 700
Chest
SID-IIs 0 Deflection > 41 mm; VC > 1.0 m/s
rear 1 Deflection < 38 mm
Abdomen
1 Force < 3500 N
Pelvis
0 Force > 5500 N
Whiplash Test @ Δv = 20 km/h ❹

2 < 8 m²/s²
NIC
0 > 30 m²/s²
1.5 Fx+ < 340 N; Fz+ < 475 N; My < 12 Nm
BioRID II Upper Neck
0 Fx+ > 730 N; Fz+ > 1130 N; My > 40 Nm
max. 5 points
1.5 Fx+ < 340 N; Fz+ < 257 N; My < 12 Nm
Lower Neck
0 Fx+ > 730 N; Fz+ > 1480 N; My > 40 Nm
Max. dyn.
-2 > 25.5°
seatback defl.
Dyn. seat
-5 > 20 mm
displacement
HRMD
-2 Y/N
interference
Additional Points ❺
1 Visual / audio signal with occupant detection
SBR passenger
max. 5 pt.
0.5 Visual / audio signal without occupant detection

SBR 2nd row 1 Status indicator for each 2nd row seat
Side protection 3 Side / curtain-airbag
Overall Rating Weighting: Occupant Protection 70 %,Pedestrian Protection + Active Safety 15 % each
Stars Total score Balancing Alle Details in:
Occupant Protection Pedestrian Protection Active Safety
❶+❷+❸+❹+❺
 90 % 95 % 75 % 72 %
 82 % 85 % 65 % 55 %
 72 % 75 % 50 % 26 %
 60 % 65 % 40 %
 45 % 55 % 20 %
 < 45 % < 55 % < 20 %
64
SAFETY
WISSEN
UPDATE
JNCAP Protocol 2018

Dummy Region Weight Points Criteria
Frontal Impact against Rigid Wall with 100 % Overlap @ 55 km/h &
against ODB with 40 % Overlap @ 64 km/h
4 HIC 36 < 650
Head 0.923 0 HIC 36 > 1000
0...-1 Modifier: steering wheel upward displacement 72...88 mm
4 Fz,tension < 2.7 kN @ 0 ms / < 2.3 kN @ 35 ms / < 1.1 kN @ 60 ms
max. 12 points (after weighting)

Neck 0.231
0 Fz,tension > 3.3 kN @ 0 ms / > 2.9 kN @ 35 ms / > 1.1 kN @ 60 ms
Fx,shear > 3.1 kN @ 0 ms / > 1.5 kN @ 25 – 35 ms / > 1.1 kN @ 45 ms
H III 4 Deflection < 22 mm
50 % Chest 0.923 0 Deflection > 42 mm; a3ms > 60 g
0...-1 Modifier: steering wheel rearward displacement 90...110 mm
2 Axial Forcecompression < 7 kN
Femur 0.923
0 Axial Forcecompression > 10 kN
2 TI < 0.4
0 TI > 1.3
Tibia 0.923 0...-1 Modifier: Pedal upward displacement 72...88 mm
0...-1 Modifier: Pedal rearward displacement 100...200 mm
-1 Modifier: Tibia Axial Force > 8.0 kN
4 HIC15 < 500
Head 0.8
0 HIC15 > 700
Fx,shear < 1200 N; Fz,tension < 1700 N;
4

Neck 0.2
Fx,shear > 1950 N; Fz,tension > 2620 N;
0
Deflection < 23 mm (ODB)
4
Deflection < 18 mm (Full-width, ODB from 4/2020)
H III 5 %
Chest 0.8 Deflection > 48 mm (ODB)
0 Deflection > 42 mm (Full-width, ODB from 4/2020)
Deflection > 34 mm (Full-width from 4/2020)
4 4 points awarded by default
Abdomen 0.8 -2 Modifier: Left belt strap rising (submarining)
-2 Modifier: Right belt strap rising (submarining)
4 Axial Forcecompression < 4.8 kN
Femur 0.4
0 Axial Forcecompression > 6.8 kN
Barrier Side Impact (AE-MDB) @ 55 km/h Rating Scheme Frontal &

Side Impact, Whiplash:
4 HIC15 < 500
Head 1.0 Level Points
max. 12 pt. (after weighting)
0 HIC15 > 700

4 Deflection < 28 mm 5 ≥ 10.5
Chest 1.0 Deflection > 50 mm
WS 50 0
Shoulder Lateral Force > 3.0 kN 4 ≥9
front
Abdomen 0.5
0 Deflection > 65 mm 3 ≥ 7.5
4 PSPF < 1.7 kN
Pelvis 0.5 2 ≥6
0 PSPF > 2.8 kN SafetyWissen by
1 <6
65
SAFETY
WISSEN
JNCAP
Dummy Criteria Weight Points Limits
Whiplash Test
4 < 8 m²/s²
NIC 1
0 > 30 m²/s²
4 < 340 N
Upper Neck Fx+
score is calculated based on the worst injury criterion

0 > 730 N
4 < 475 N

Upper Neck Fz+
0 > 1130 N
4 < 12 Nm
Upper Neck My Flexion
0 > 40 Nm
4 < 12 Nm
BioRID II Upper Neck My Extension
0 > 40 Nm
2
4 < 340 N
Lower Neck Fx+
0 > 730 N
4 < 257 N
Lower Neck Fz+
0 > 1480 N
4 < 12 Nm
Lower Neck My Flexion
0 > 40 Nm
4 < 12 Nm
Lower Neck My Extension
0 > 40 Nm
Where a value falls between the upper and lower limit, the score is calculated by linear interpolation (sliding scale).
Passive Safey Rating

max. weighted
max. score weight score total total
Occupant Protection
Full-width Frontal
Driver 12 0.875 10.5
Passenger 12 0.875 10.5
Offset Frontal
Driver 12 0.875 10.5
Passenger (rear) 12 0.875 10.5
59 100
Side Impact
Driver 12 0.625 7.5  ≥ 822
Passenger1 12 0.625 7.5  ≥ 72.5
 ≥ 63
Whiplash
 ≥ 53.5
Driver 12 0.083 1  < 53.5
Passenger 12 0.083 1
Pedestrian Protection ( page 98)
Head Impact 4 8 32
37
Leg Impact 4 1.25 5
Seat Belt Reminder
Front 50 0.04 2
4
Rear 50 0.04 2
1
For the passenger the same score as for the driver is assumed.
2
Downgrade to 4 stars, unless at least level 4 is reached for occupant protection and pedestrian protection.
66
Bertrandt is ...
Active and Passive Vehicle Safety … Testing Laboratories …
Technical Calculation/CAE … Development Expertise ...
Optimising quality, reducing development time, cutting costs: to achieve all this, we employ
the very latest testing procedures and development methods. Always with the aim of ensuring
safety for the vehicles of tomorrow. By applying state-of-the-art CAE tools and testing equip-
ment and with our mobile laboratory for active safety, we provide high-precision data for the
development process.
As a result, we are always prepared to assume responsibility for functional development and
the validation of vehicle safety requirements – from basic components to complete vehicles.
The best solution for every customer.

www.bertrandt.com I [email protected]
SAFETY
WISSEN
KNCAP Protocol 2019
Category Impact Safety Pedestrian Safety Driving Safety

Full Width Frontal 16 Head Impact 24 Rollover 5
Offset Deformable Barrier 16 Leg Impact 6 Braking 5
Barrier Side Impact 16 Basic Active Devices:
Child Protection 8 FCW 1
Whiplash 4 LDW 1
Pole Side Impact (optional 1) 2 SLD 1
SBR front 1
SBR rear 1
AEB Inter-Urban 2
AEB City 3
Additional Active Devices1 2
max. total
60 points 30 points 20 points
points (1)
normalized
actual points / (1) actual points / (1) actual points / (1)
score (2)
weighting
60 % 20 % 20 %
(3)
weighted Overall score (5)
(2) x (3) (2) x (3) (2) x (3)
score (4) max. 100
Overall classification: Minimum normalized scores (2) and total score (5) per rating class
1st Grade ≥ 90.1 % ≥ 60.1 % - ≥ 86.1 %
2nd Grade ≥ 83.1 % ≥ 50.1 % - ≥ 81.1 %
3rd Grade ≥ 76.1 % ≥ 40.1 % - ≥ 76.1 %
4th Grade ≥ 69.1 % ≥ 35.1 % - ≥ 71.1 %
5th Grade ≤ 69.0 % ≤ 35.0 % - ≤ 71.0 %
Star rating per category: Minimum normalized scores (2) for the respective star rating
Category Impact Safety Pedestrian Safety Driving Safety
 ≥ 93.1 % ≥ 83.1 % ≥ 84.8 %
 ≥ 90.1 % ≥ 63.1 % ≥ 70.5 %
 ≥ 87.1 % ≥ 43.1 % ≥ 55.4 %
 ≥ 84.1 % ≥ 23.1 % ≥ 40.3 %
 ≤ 84.0 % ≤ 23.0 % ≤ 40.2 %
1
Optional items can be assessed upon the manufacturers request. The maximum total points remains the same. ASCC (0.5); BSD
(0.5); RCTA (0.5); LKA (0.5); ISA (0.5); AEB Pedstrian (1); Advanced Airbag (1) - Max. total points for Additional Active Devices = 2
68
SAFETY
WISSEN
KNCAP Protocol 2019

HIC15 < 500; a3ms < 72 g;
4
My,extension < 42 Nm; Fz,tension < 2.7 kN; Fx,shear < 1.9 kN
Head, Neck
HIC15 > 700 ; a3ms > 80 g;
0
My,extension > 57 Nm; Fz,tension > 3.3 kN; Fx,shear > 3.1 kN
H III 50 % Chest
Femur 4 Axial Forcecompr < 3.8 kN; Knee displacement < 6 mm
Knee 0 Axial Forcecompr > 9.07 kN; Knee displacement > 15 mm
4 TI < 0.4; Axial Forcecompr < 2 kN
Tibia
max. 16 points
0 TI > 1.3; Axial Forcecompr > 8 kN
-1 Unstable airbag/incorrect airbag deployment (from head score)
-1 Excessive head forward excursion (from head score)
-1 Steering wheel detachment from steering column (from driver score)
0...-1 Steering wheel upward displacement 72...88 mm (from head score)
0...-1 Steering wheel rearward displacement 90...110 mm (from head score)
-1 Steering wheel contact (from chest score)
-2 Shoulder belt load > 6 kN (from chest score)
Modifiers
0...-1 A-pillar rearward displacement 100...200 mm (from chest score)
-1 Door latch or hinge failure (from chest score)
-1 Incorrect airbag deployment (from femur score)
0...-1 Pedal upward displacement 72...88 mm (from tibia score)
0...-1 Pedal rearward displacement 100...200 mm (from tibia score)
-1/door Door opening during impact
-1 Fuel leakage
Frontal-Impact against Rigid Wall with 100 % Overlap @ 56.3 km/h

4 HIC15 < 500; a3ms < 72 g
Head1
0 HIC15 > 700; a3ms > 80 g
4 Fx,shear < 1.2 kN; Fz,tension < 1.7 kN; My,extension < 36 Nm
Neck 2
0 Fx,shear > 1.95 kN, Fz,tension > 2.62 kN, My,extension > 49 Nm
H III 5 %
Chest
4 Axial Forcecompr < 2.6 kN
Femur max. 16 points4
0 Axial Forcecompr > 6.2 kN
-1 Unstable airbag/incorrect airbag deployment (from head score)
-1 Excessive head forward excursion (from head score)
-1 Steering column displacement (from head score)
-1 Steering wheel detachment from steering column (from driver score)
-4 Rear seat: excessive head forward excursion (from head score)
-2 Rear seat: head contact with vehicle interior (from head score)
Modifiers
-1 Steering wheel contact (from chest score)
-2 Shoulder belt load > 6 kN (from chest score)
-1 Incorrect airbag deployment (from femur score)
-4 Submarining3 (from femur score)
-1/door Door opening during impact
-1 Fuel leakage
1
For the rear passenger in the rigid wall impact the score is based on a3ms only, if there is no hard contact.
2
For the rear passenger, the neck score is the sum of all three criteria, with the following maximum score per criterion:
Shear 1 point, Tension 1 point, Extension 2 points
3
When any of the two iliac forces drops 1 kN within 1 ms and when the submarining is confirmed on the high speed film.
4
The total score is the weighted average of the front seat score (weight = 2) and the rear seat score (weight = 1).
69
SAFETY
WISSEN
KNCAP Protocol 2019
Barrier Side Impact (AE-MDB) @ 55 km/h

4 HIC15 < 500; a3ms < 72 g
Head
0 HIC15 > 700; a3ms > 80 g
4 Deflection < 28 mm;
Chest
0 Deflection > 50 mm; VC ≥ 1.0 m/s; Shoulder ForceLateral ≥ 3.0 kN
max. 16 points
WS 50 %
4 Deflection < 47 mm;
Abdomen
0 Deflection > 65 mm; VC ≥ 1.0 m/s
4 PSPF < 1.7 kN
Pelvis
0 PSPF > 2.8 kN
-1 Incorrect airbag deployment (from head score)
Modifiers -1/door Door opening during impact
-1 Fuel leakage

2 HIC15 < 500
WS 50 % Head
max. 2 pt.
0 HIC15 > 700
-1 Incorrect airbag deployment (from head score)
Modifiers -1/door Door opening during impact
-0.5 Fuel leakage
Whiplash Test
Dynamic Assessment Front Seat 1.5 Points 0 Points
NIC 11.00 24.00
Nkm 0.15 0.55
max. 9 points
Rebound velocity (m/s) 3.2 4.8
max. 10 points
BioRID
Upper Neck Fx,shear (N) 30 190
IIg
Upper Neck Fz,tension (N) 360 750
T1 acceleration1 (g) 9.30 13.10
T-HRC1 (ms) 57 82
max. 14 points (scaled to 4)

Geometry Assessment Front Seat 1 Point -1 Point
Backset (mm) 40 100
max.
HRMD
1 pt
Height (mm) 0 80
Geometry Assessment Rear Seat 1 Point 0 Points
Heff in highest position ≥ 770 < 770
(mm) in worst case position ≥ 720 < 720
max. 4 points
≤ 504.5  sin (Torso angle- > 504.5  sin (Torso angle-

ΔCP X in highest position
2.6) + 116 2.6) + 116
≤ 504.5  sin (Torso angle- > 504.5  sin (Torso angle-
ΔCP X in worst case position
2.6) + 116 2.6) + 116
Non-Use position acc. to KMVSS or no
yes no
Non-Use position
Modifiers
Fixed or integrated head restraint / no height lock -2
Height lock failure -2
Only the maximum score from either T1 acceleration or head restraint contact time is used in the rating.
1
70
Small CATapult of 0.8 and 1.4 MN. It is a
Crash Simulation System for testing
compact components (seats, belts, child
restraints, batteries, etc).
Active Lateral Intrusion Simulation on-board system

is composed of up to 6 High Dynamic Actuators. Also
available off-board and stand-alone versions.
Dynamic Impact Test System for Active

Bonnet Pedestrian Detection Misuse
inside climatic chamber featuring
Pedestrian Protection, Steering System,
Interior Impact and Ejection Mitigation.
www.encopim.com
The Analysis System for

Active Vehicle Safety
Keep up with future demands.
x Automated and interactive test analysis
(AEB, FCW, LSS)
x Standard tests and custom scenarios
x Analysis according to international
standards and regulations
x Proven software basis (X-Crash family)
x Ongoing adaptation to new regulations
X-Crash Zero supports international

standards such as Euro NCAP.
www.measx.com/x-crash
SAFETY
WISSEN
Bharat New Car Assessment Program (India)

Phase I Assessment scheme
Max. points
available for
meeting relevant Max. points
legal (AIS) available for meet-
Category Test / Requirement requirements ing BNCAP criteria Max. total score
ODB Frontal Test 40 % / 56 km/h
4 12
Adult Occupant (AIS 098 / UN R94)
24
Protection MDB Side Test 50 km/h
4 4
(AIS 099 / UN R95)
Child Occupant Dynamic Assessment in
- 4 4
Protection ODB Frontal Test
Pedestrian
Head Impact (AIS 100) 4 - 4
Protection
Rear Impact (AIS 101 / UN R34) 2
Type approved ABS System 2
Seat Belt Reminder (SBR)
2
Driver 1 point, Passenger 1 point
Seat Belt Reminder (SBR)
1
all forward facing rear seats
Other
Validated Electronic Stability Control
Safety Features - 1 12
(ESC)
(OSF)
Validated Electronic Brake
1
Distribution (EBD)
Type approved Head Restraint System
1
(for all forward facing outboard seats)
Child Lock Functionality Check 1
Speed Warning system 1
Total score 44
Overall Rating Adult Occupant Protection

required points required points
Rating % of max % of max
(out of max. 44) (out of max. 24)
1 37.4 85 21 87.5
 34.1 77.5 19 79.2
 30.8 70 17 70.8
 27.5 62.5 14.5 60.4
 24.2 55 12 50
 20.9 47.5 8.4 35
 17.6 40 4.8 20
 15.4 35 3.6 15
 13.2 30 2.4 10
6.6 15 1.2 5
1
To be eligible for 5 stars the frontal offset crash test must be conducted at 64 km/h.
Note: BNCAP is still in its introduction phase. Therefore modifications may still occur.
72
Passive Sicherheit
Product Liability in the Automobile Industry
Course Description Course Objectives

In the framework of the ongoing extension of active and pas- The aim of this course is to convey the importance of product
sive safety systems automobiles are becoming increasingly liability for businesses and employees as well as an under-
complex. standing of preventive measures.
In this context the faultlessness of systems becomes more and Who should attend?
more important, as with growing complexity, especially in the The seminar is aimed at all decision-makers in the automotive
field of autonomous vehicles, not only the number but also development, production and at suppliers who want to learn
the severity of possible faults is increasing. Even implemented about the consequences of product liability and want to get
equal parts strategies can quickly lead to a large number of familiar with preventive measures.
affected vehicles in case of defects. An indicator for this is the
growing number of recalls in recent years. Course Contents
Each manufacturer holds the responsibility for consequential Fundamentals of Product Liability
Civil and criminal responsibility of the company and
damages caused by its products when used as intended. This
responsibility is defined by law in all countries and has civil and personal liability of employees
Liability for Defects
criminal penalties.
Product liability in Europe and in the U.S.
Examples include cases of damage and recalls of large num-
U.S. TREAD ACT, Reporting obligation for OEMs and
bers of vehicles that several OEMs were obliged to do during
the last few years. suppliers
Motor Vehicle Whistleblower Act (what to expect?)
Importance of norms and standards (e.g. ISO26262
Obviously a safety related recall of a mass product may have
severe or even existence-threatening consequences. Functional Safety)
Product liability and advertisement / public relations of
Consequently, manufacturers must ensure faultlessness companies

Quality management and its relevance from a product
throughout their organization. Amongst others, questions
may raise like: liability point of view
Product liability in the supply chain
Who in the company is responsible for product safety?
Consequences of new technologies (driver assistance
Is your entire organization set up to avoid safety-related
errors or to reduce the risk? systems, autonomous vehicles)
Instructions, warnings
Is compliance with product liability ensured throughout
Risk minimization within the organization, prevention
the company?
Preventive product safety measures during product
In the case of allegations, can targeted and
comprehensive evidence be quickly provided? development
Product observation and resulting consequences
How can unwarranted claims be averted?
Documentation, conclusive evidence
What can be learned from the product liability cases,
Insurance of product liability risk
which are particularly well received by the public?
Recall decision and processing
Hans-Georg Lohrmann was Manager of Reliability & Conformity of Production at ZF TRW Automotive
Instructor
GmbH. He has many years of experience in the field of safety, reliability and product liability in the automotive
sector. Since September 2015 he has retired and is still active as a freelance consultant. He specializes in the
area of restraint systems for vehicle occupant protection and supports his clients in the areas of reliability,
safety planning and methods of verification and litigation support.

Dates
73
Passive Safety
Static Vehicle Safety Tests in Automotive Development

When thinking about vehicle safety testing people first think Introduction
about dynamic crash tests of the full vehicle or crash simula- Static roof crush according to FMVSS 216a
tions performed on a sled test facility. In addition to these Static door intrusion according to FMVSS 214
dynamic tests, however, numerous other tests on the car Test procedures for exterior and interior parts
body and components such as seats, steering, instrument FMVSS 201U, UN R21 & R42
panel, pillars, bumpers, etc. have to be performed during the Testing of seats and head restraints according
development of a car. At first sight, these experiments perhaps to FMVSS 202 and UN R17, R21 and R25
are less spectacular, but in practice they are also very complex. Test procedures on seat-belts according to UN R14
The seminar provides an introduction to static vehicle safety and R21
testing. Static vehicle safety tests serve the determination of Test procedures for steering systems according
criteria to minimize injury that may occur due to an accident. to FMVSS 203, UN R12
The seminar covers the entire field of static vehicle safety test- Test procedures for child seat anchors (ISOFIX)
ing, ranging from biomechanical research to legal regulations of FMVSS 225
and consumer protection related requirements. It discusses
the required test equipment (impactors, test facilities) and
the typical load cases of the experiments. Finally, the testing
specifications, including the protection criteria are explained.
Course Objectives
After participating in the seminar "Static Vehicle Safety Tests
in Automotive Development", the participants have gained an
overview of the static vehicle safety tests to be performed on
the car body and the components. They have acquired knowl-
edge about the essential procedures in Europe and North
America as well as their backgrounds and gained insight into
equipment necessary to carry out the experiments.
Who should attend?
The seminar is aimed at specialists from crash-related car
body and component development, engineers and techni-
cians from test and analysis departments as well as project
engineers and managers.
Matthias Kunkel (ACTS GmbH & Co. KG) has been with ACTS GmbH & Co. KG in the field of testing
Instructors
since 2000. As a test engineer, he is currently the team leader for component safety tests.
Alexander Martellucci (ACTS GmbH & Co. KG) began his professional career in physical laborato-
ries in the pharmaceutical industry. Since 1992 he is involved in the testing of components for vehicle safety.
Until 1995 he worked in the steering wheel laboratory and until 1998 he headed the airbag testing at TRW.
Since 1998 he has been with ACTS GmbH & Co. KG until 2002 as head of the component laboratory, and since
then as manager Technology.

Dates
74
Passive Safety
NEW
Crashworthy and Lightweight Car Body Design

In the development of a car body different - sometimes con- Mechanics of crash events
flicting - design requirements have to be met. Depending on Accelerations during collisions
the intended drive unit, the fulfilling of the crash regulations Structural loading during collisions
Examination of real crash events
considering the lightweight principles is a key task. Therefore,
Stability problems
it is mandatory that designers have a good understanding of Plasticity
the crash behavior of mechanical structures. The combination Lightweight principles for the car body design
of knowledge about mechanics and the ability to use modern Lightweight design rules
design tools allows for an efficient development process with- Car body design
out unnecessary design iterations. CAE conform design
Course Objectives Crash simulation
Finite Element modelling of a car body
The objective of the seminar is to present new methods for Finite Element analysis with explicit methods
crashworthy car body design. At the beginning of the course Possibilities and limitations
the mechanical phenomena of crash events will be discussed. Technical implementation of safety measures
Subsequently modern development methods (CAD design Energy absorbing members
and crash simulation) will be treated. Thereafter modern Car bodies
implementations of safety design measures will be presented. Electric car bodies
Mathematical optimization of structural design - which is Safety systems
increasingly used in industry - will be covered at the end of Pedestrian protection
Post crash
the course.
Use of mathematical optimization procedures in real
Who should attend? world applications
This 2 day course addresses designers, test and simulation Approximation techniques
engineers as well as project leaders and managers working in Optimization software & strategies
car body development and analysis. Shape and topology optimization
Prof. Dr.-Ing. Axel Schumacher (University of Wuppertal) studied mechanical engineering at

Instructor
the universities of Duisburg and Aachen. He received his doctorate on structural optimization from the Univer-
sity of Siegen. Following research projects for Airbus were focused on the optimization of aircraft structures.
Thereafter he worked in the CAE methods development department of Adam Opel AG as project leader for
structural optimization. From 2003 - 2012 he was a professor at the University of Applied Sciences in Hamburg
and taught structural design, passive safety and structural optimization. Since 2012 he has been professor at
the University of Wuppertal, where he holds the chair for optimization of mechanical structures.

Dates
75
SAFETY
WISSEN
Roof Crush
1829 mm
5° Centerline of Test Device
Headform with Load Cell

Forwardmost Point of Roof (FMVSS only)
762 254 mm
mm
Rigid Horizontal Support of
25° Sills / Chassis Frame
Centerline of Test Device
Initial Point of Contact
FMVSS 216a TP-216a-00, May 2009

IIHS Testing Protocol Version III (July 2016) Application:
Platen Displacement: 127 mm Vehicles with a GVWR ≤ 4536 kg
Feed Rate: 5 mm/s Applied Force:

for vehicles with a GVWR ≤ 2722 kg:
Single Side Test: Lab selects worst case F = 3.0 x UVW x 9.8 m/s2
Assessment: for vehicles with a GVWR > 2722 kg:
based on Strength-to-weight ratio (SWR) = Fmax / m x g F = 1.5 x UVW x 9.8 m/s2
SWR Rating Feed Rate: ≤ 13 mm/s
≥ 4.00 Good Double Sided Test
≥ 3.25 till < 4.00 Acceptable Requirements:
Platen displacement ≤ 127 mm
≥ 2.50 till < 3.25 Marginal Load on headform located at head position of 50 % male
< 2.50 Poor ≤ 222 N
A „Good“ rating in the roof crush test is a requirement for UVW = Unloaded Vehicle Weight
the Top Safety Pick award. GVWR = Gross Vehicle Weight Rating
76
SAFETY
WISSEN
FMVSS 208: Frontal Impact Requirements: In-Position

TP-208-14, April 2008
In-Position – Test Configurations

Full-Width Test ODB Test
unbelted belted
ODB 40%
5 % Female Dummy
 mm
200
0° / ± 5° 0° / ± 5°  0o
32-40 km/h 56 km/h 40 km/h
Hybrid III Hybrid III Hybrid III Hybrid III Hybrid III Hybrid III
5% 5% 5% 5% 5% 5%
0° / ± 30°
50 % Male Dummy
0o
32-40 km/h 56 km/h
Hybrid III Hybrid III Hybrid III Hybrid III

50 % 50 % 50 % 50 %
FMVSS 208: Frontal Impact Requirements: Out of Position

Front seat Dummy Test configuration
chin on airbag module in steering wheel
Driver side Hybrid III 5 % female
chin on top of steering wheel
CRABI 12 m in 23 defined CRS / positions
chest on instrument panel
Hybrid III 3 y/o
Passenger side head on instrument panel
chest on instrument panel
Hybrid III 6 y/o
head on instrument panel
78
Passive Safety
Development of Frontal Restraint Systems meeting

Legal and Consumer Protection Requirements
Course Description steering column, knee bolster, seat, ...) on the efficiency of the
Belts, belt-load limiters, airbags, steering column, knee bol- entire system. Finally future topics such as the compatibility
ster, seat … - only if all the components of a frontal restraint of vehicles as well as pre-crash preparation and prevention of
system are in perfect harmony it is possible to meet the accidents are integrated into the seminar.
different legal limit values as well as the requirements of
consumer tests. However, these requirements, e.g. FMVSS Who should attend?
208, U.S. NCAP, Euro NCAP et al. are manifold and extensive, The seminar addresses simulation and test engineers, project
partly contradict each other, or the requirements superpose engineers and project managers as well as the heads of devel-
each other. Therefore it is a challenge for every development opment departments in the field of passive safety who work
engineer to develop a restraint system by a clear, strategic on the design of restraint-systems for vehicles.
procedure; time-saving and target-oriented with an optimal
result. In this 2-day seminar this strategic way of development
will be shown. You will learn a procedure how to ideally solve Course Contents
the complex development task of a typical frontal restraint- Identification of the relevant development load cases
Procedures for the development of a restraint system
system design within the scope of the available tools test
Influence and importance of individual system
and simulation. Especially the importance and the influence
of individual system components (e.g. belt-load limiters) for components on the overall performance
Development strategy for UN regulations and NAR
the accomplishment of development-sub tasks (e.g. minimum
chest deflection) will be covered. In addition the influence of restraint systems
Development path for the conformance to the OoP
the airbag module design on the hazards of Out-of-Position
(OoP) situations is going to be discussed, and a possible requirements according to FMVSS 208
development-path for the compliance with the OoP require-
ments according to the FMVSS 208 legislation will be shown.
The possibilities and limits of the development tools test and
simulation will be discussed and communicated. Last but not
least tips and tricks for a successful overall system design will
be part of this seminar.
In this seminar you will become familiar with a procedure for

the successful development of a frontal restraint system. Fur-
thermore you will learn which development tool, simulation
or test, is best suited for the respective sub task. Moreover
you will be made aware of the influence of the individual com-
ponents of a restraint system (belts, belt-load limiters, airbags,
Kai Golowko (Bertrandt Ingenieurbüro GmbH) has been working in the area of vehicle safety
Instructor
since 1999. He started his career as a test engineer for passive safety at ACTS. Since 2003 he has been working
as senior engineer for occupant safety and pedestrian protection. Since 2005 he has managed the department
vehicle safety at Bertrandt in Gaimersheim. He has also been responsible for active and passive vehicle safety
for the Bertrandt Group since 2017.

Dates
05.-06.03.2020 20/3601 Gaimersheim 2 Days 1.340,- EUR till 06.02.2020, thereafter 1.590,- EUR
05.-06.11.2020 20/3603 Tappenbeck 2 Days 1.340,- EUR till 08.10.2020, thereafter 1.590,- EUR
79
Rigid Barrier Deformable Barrier
Configuration Criterion Out of Position
In-Position In-Position
CMVSS 208 (old),
FMVSS 208 UN R94, FMVSS 208 FMVSS 208
Requirements ADR 69/00, UN R137
CMVSS 208 ADR 73/00 CMVSS 208 CMVSS 208
FMVSS 208 (old)
Dummy Hybrid III Hybrid III Hybrid III Hybrid III Hybrid III Hybrid III Hybrid III Hybrid III Hybrid III Hybrid III CRABI
Protection Criteria for Frontal Impact Tests
Size 50 % male 50 % male 5 % female 50 % male 5 % female 50 % male 5 % female 5 % female 6 year 3 year 1 year
HIC36 /HPC36 [-] 1000 (FMVSS, ADR) 1000 1000 1000
Head HIC15 [-] 700 (CMVSS) 700 700 700 700 700 570 390
a3ms [g] 80 80 80
Nij [-] (4 Values) 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0
3.1 @ 0 ms
Fx,shear [kN] 3.1 2.7 1.5 @ 25-35 ms
1.1 @ ≥ 45 ms
Neck 3.3 @ 0 ms
Fz,tension [kN] 4.17 2.62 3.3 2.9 2.9 @ 35 ms 2.62 2.07 1.49 1.13 0.78
1.1 @ ≥ 60 ms
Fz,compr. [kN] 4.0 2.52 2.52 2.52 1.82 1.38 0.96
My [Nm] 57 57 57
a3ms [g] 60 60 60 60 60 60 55 50
76.2 (FMVSS. ADR)
Chest Deflection [mm] 63 52 42 34 42 52 52 40 34 301
50 (CMVSS)
VC [m/s] 1.0 1.0 1.0
UPDATE
9.07 @ 0 ms
Femur Axial Force [kN] 10 10 6.805 9.07 7 6.805 6.8
7.58 @ > 10 ms
Knee Displacement [mm] 15
TI [-] 1.3 (4 Values)
Tibia
WISSEN
SAFETY
Axial Forcecompr. [kN] 8.0

currently no measurement possible
1
80
RUGGEDIZED HIGH-SPEED CAMERAS FROM PHOTRON
Ideally suited for both on-board and off-board vehicle safety testing, the FASTCAM Mini CX
and FASTCAM MH6 deliver HD resolution, high frame rate, outstanding light sensitivity
and durability in a compact, stand-alone package.
FASTCAM MINI CX FASTCAM MH6

• Standalone compact camera • Multiple miniature camera heads
• 1920 x 1080 (Full HD) resolution at 1,000fps • Central processor
• High-G tested to 150G • Up to six 35 x 35 x 36mm camera heads
• Built-in battery for 30 minutes of operation • 1920 x 1080 (Full HD) resolution at 1,000fps
• Auto download to removable CFast card • High-G tested to 160G
• WiFi for wireless live view and camera setup • Auto download to internal 512GB SSD
• Built-in acceleration sensor
Photron Europe / USA Photron China Photron Japan

www.photron.com www.photron.cn.com www.photron.co.jp
[email protected] [email protected] [email protected]
Passive Safety
Early Increase of Design Maturity of Restraint System Components

in the Reduced Prototype Vehicle Development Process
The number of hardware prototypes available for the devel- The seminar is aimed at engineers and project managers of
opment of restraint systems and restraint system components restraint systems and restraint system components develop-
is declining steadily due to an increasing cost pressure in auto- ment, as well as heads of teams or departments in the field
motive development. In the project schedule the availability of of passive safety, which want to gain, in addition to the pure
hardware (restraint system components and / or vehicle envi- functional development of restraint systems, an overview of
ronments) shifts to the late vehicle development phases. As a the requirements of the prototype-reduced restraint system
result, ensuring the required degree of maturity of restraint development with regard to achieving and ensuring the nec-
system components, in addition to the sole functional devel- essary degree of maturity of belts and airbags.
opment of seat belts and airbag, necessitates new strategies
and development paths. In this seminar, current risks in the Course Contents
development of seat belts and airbags are addressed and Overview and differences of vehicle development
ideas for the early increase of maturity are elucidated. This is schedules
done by explaining the link between milestones in the devel- Standard project schedule
opment schedule, the functional requirements of restraint Prototype-reduced development of lead series
system components, the development duration of restraint Prototype-reduced development of derivatives
system components and the description of approaches for Safety belts
the creation of substitutes of vehicle environments in the early Examples of requirements for safety belts
development process. In addition the project schedules of Prerequisites and timing for functional development
Timing for homologation and certification
conventional vehicle development processes and prototype-
Ideas / possibilities for creating vehicle environments
reduced development processes of base line models and Interactions with surrounding components
derivatives are shown. Interactions of the development of Airbags
seatbelts and airbags with surrounding components (e.g. trim Examples of requirements for airbags
parts) are also discussed. Prerequisites and timing for functional development
Ideas / possibilities for creating vehicle environments
Interactions with surrounding components
Course Objectives
The course provides thoughts and ideas for a successful
approach in the development of restraint systems within
vehicle development processes in which only a small number
of prototypes are available for verification and optimization of
the systems.
Sandro Hübner (EDAG Engineering GmbH) studied mechanical engineering at the University of
Instructor
Applied Sciences Schmalkalden. After completing his studies he worked as an engineer in the FEM laboratory
of Schmalkalden University of Applied Sciences. From 2003 he worked as a CAE engineer for occupant safety
at EASi Engineering GmbH. In 2006, he moved to EDAG Engineering GmbH as a CAE engineer for vehicle safety
and has been project manager for vehicle safety and CAE since 2013.

Dates
82
SAFETY
WISSEN
UPDATE
Frontal Impact Protection Criteria Compared

Regulation Crash ATD
Criterion Type [UoM]
HIC15 [-] 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000
FMVSS 208 FWRB/ODB HIII 5/50
FMVSS 208 OOP HIII 5
FMVSS 208 OOP HIII 6y/o
FMVSS 208 OOP CRABI 12 m
Euro NCAP1 ODB/MPDB HIII / TH
C-NCAP ODB/FWRB HIII 5
JNCAP ODB HIII 5
IIHS ODB/SOB HIII 50
HIC36 [-] 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000
UN R94 ODB HIII 50
UN R137 FWRB HIII 5/50
JNCAP ODB/FWRB HIII 50
Head a3ms [g] 60 65 70 75 80 85 90 95

UN R94 ODB HIII 50
Euro NCAP1 ODB/MPDB HIII / TH
Chest Compression [mm] 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80

UN R94 ODB HIII 50
FMVSS 208 FWRB/ODB HIII 5
FMVSS 208 FWRB HIII 50
FMVSS 208 OOP CRABI 12m
Euro NCAP MPDB TH 50
Euro NCAP FWRB HIII 5
JNCAP FWRB HIII 5
JNCAP ODB HIII 5
Legend: Regulations: requirements are met / NCAP: maximum score
Regulations: requirements not met / NCAP: zero score
Linear interpolation of the score between the upper and lower limit
1
assessed only if Head ares peak > 80 g
Please note that the values indicated in this graph may be rounded and that additional criteria may exist. Please take exact values
and additional criteria from the tables for the respective regulation.
83
SAFETY
WISSEN
UPDATE

Criterion Type [UoM]
Chest a3ms [g] 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
FMVSS 208 FWRB/ODB HIII 5/50
FMVSS 208 OOP CRABI 12 m
Chest VCmax [m/s] 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4
UN R94 ODB HIII 50
Euro NCAP ODB/MPDB HIII 5/50
Femur Faxial [kN] 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14

UN R94 ODB HIII 50
UN R137 FWRB HIII 5
UN R137 FWRB HIII 50
FMVSS 208 ODB HIII 50
FMVSS 208 ODB/FWRB HIII 5
Euro NCAP MPDB TH/HIII 50
Euro NCAP FWRB HIII 5
C-NCAP ODB HIII 50
JNCAP ODB HIII 5
Knee Displacement [mm] 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18

UN R94 ODB HIII 50
Tibia Index [-] 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4
UN R94 ODB HIII 50
Tibia Compression [kN] 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14

UN R94 ODB HIII 50
84
SAFETY
WISSEN
UPDATE
Safety Requirements for Rear Seats and Restraint Systems

Frontal impact tests with rear seat occupants
2020 2021
Euro NCAP FWRB Euro NCAP / ANCAP MPDB KNCAP FWRB ASEAN NCAP ODB
MPDB 1400 kg
ODB
0°, 50 %
40 %
0
o 50 km/h 0o
50 km/h  mm
150
 0o 56 km/h  mm
200
 0o
50 km/h 64 km/h
H III H III H III H III
5% 5% THOR H III 5% 5% H III H III
H III 50 % 50 % H III 50 % 50 %
5% Q6 Q10 5% Q1.5 Q3
JNCAP ODB C-NCAP FWRB C-NCAP ODB Latin NCAP ODB

MPDB 1400 kg
ODB ODB ODB
0°, 50 %
40 % 40 % 40 %
0o 50 km/h
 mm
200
 0o 50 km/h  mm
200
 0o
 mm
150
 0o
 mm
200
 0o
64 km/h 64 km/h 50 km/h 64 km/h
H III H III
H III 50 % 50 % H III H III THOR H III H III H III
50 % H III Q3 50 % 50 % 50 % 5% 50 % 50 %
H III 5% H III H III Q10 Q3 Q1.5
5% 5% 5%
FMVSS 201: Head impact on belt UN R14: Belt

anchorages UN R16: Belt system
FMVSS 207: Seat stability UN R17: Seat anchorages
FMVSS 208: Belt system UN R21: Head impact
FMVSS 209: Belt system UN R25: Head rests
FMVSS 213: Child seats UN R44: Child seats
FMVSS 225: ISOFIX anchorages UN R129: Child seats
UN R145: ISOFIX anchorages
Side impacts tests with rear seat occupants
FMVSS 214 U.S. NCAP IIHS / C-IASI C-NCAP

 mm ES-2 re  mm  mm WS
ES-2 re 279
 WS
379

350

50 %
54 62 50 % SID IIs
km km
27° /h 27° /h MDB IIHS AE-MDB,
1400 kg
48 km/h 55 km/h 50 km/h
90° 50 km/h
MDB, 1368 kg MDB, SID IIs 90°

SID IIs 1368 kg SID IIs SID IIs ES-2
Euro NCAP MDB Latin NCAP MDB ASEAN NCAP KNCAP

 mm
300
WS  mm
300  mm
300  mm
300
WS
 
50 % 
ES-2 ES-2

50 %
AE-MDB, AE-MDB,
MDB EEVC MDB EEVC
1400 kg 1400 kg
50 km/h 50 km/h
60 km/h 90° 90° 60 km/h
90° 950 kg 950 kg 90°
Q10 Q6 Q1.5 Q3 Q3 Q1.5 Q10 Q6
85
Passive Safety
Rear Seat Occupant Protection in Frontal Impact

While the design of restraint systems for the rear seats used to The seminar addresses simulation and test engineers, project
be a secondary issue, it has moved in the focus of research and engineers and project managers as well as the heads of devel-
development since the introduction of occupant safety assess- opment departments in the field of passive safety who work in
ments on adult and child dummies in rear seats in consumer R&D of occupant restraint-systems.
protection tests. In addition to looking at Euro NCAP, however,
requirements of other NCAPs as well as legal requirements Course Contents
must be considered for a sensible design of the restraint sys- Typical injury patterns in real accident events and
tem. Last but not least, a system design must also consider real injury risk curves
life aspects. Starting from knowledge on typical injury patterns Legal requirements
in real-world accidents, this 1-day seminar discusses both Requirements from consumer testing
NCAP and legal requirements for the frontal crash. In addition, Dummies on the rear seat; Q6 and Q10 child dummies,
the dummies to be used in the vehicle rear will be presented, Hybrid III 5 %
in particular the Q6 and Q10 dummies will be discussed. For Relevant protection criteria for the most important
the most important load cases, the most relevant protection load cases
criteria and possibilities for influencing them through the Solutions for restraint system design and optimization
restraint parameters are being examined. The seminar will be Overview: Safety of occupants in new seating positions
rounded off by approaches for designing restraint systems for (automated driving)
the back seat and an outlook on new seating positions possible
in the context of automated driving.
Course Objectives
The objective of the seminar is to provide an understanding
of the requirements and specifics in rear seat occupant pro-
tection, to provide the knowledge of test configurations and
dummies, and to provide a view on state-of-the-art solutions.
Dr.-Ing. Burkhard Eickhoff (Autoliv B.V. & Co. KG) studied mechanical engineering in Hannover
Instructor
(Germany) focusing on vehicle engineering and applied mechanics. Starting from 1999 he worked with Autoliv
B.V. & Co. KG as a test engineer for sled and crash tests. Since 2003 he has been project manager in systems
development (safety belt) of the same company. He was involved in the definition and assessment of new
restraint systems and he conducted feasibility studies using system simulation as well as dynamical tests.
Moreover he had a consultant role regarding restraint system design. He finished his doctoral thesis at the
Helmut Schmidt University Hamburg in 2012 on the reduction of belt induced thorax deflection in frontal
crashes. Since 2016 he has been head of the department Virtual & System Engineering, Homologation at
Autoliv B.V. & Co. KG.

Date
86
Passive Safety
Crash-Sensing and Intelligent Restraint Systems
Course Description interior variances. In the seminar, (predictive-) crash sensors,

Sensors are the organs of perception of vehicle safety: Recog- restraint (pre-) triggering crash algorithms and (pre-crash)
nizing accident risks in split of seconds, they control accident occupant protection systems are discussed for the follow-
mitigation systems and occupant protection systems accu- ing accident scenarios: Frontal- and rear-end collisions, side
rately, reliably and effectively. Mechanical Electrical Micro impact, vehicle rollover, and accidents with pedestrians and
Systems (MEMS) such as micro-oscillators or gyros on the cyclists. From scratch, the seminar explains simply and under-
scale of micrometers sense even the most subtle movements standably the physical principles of sensors and measuring
and shocks and will stabilize the car, prevent vehicle roll and systems, their properties and application specific benefits and
activate the occupant protection systems such as seat belt drawbacks, the restraint triggering algorithms in particular.
pre-tensioners, airbags and other protection devices accord- A specific focus is on future safety systems and technologies,
ing to crash type and severity. Predictive surround sensors such as artificial intelligence / neural networks, and new occu-
such as radar, LiDAR, cameras and ultrasonic detect accident pant protection systems in autonomous cars.
risks at an early stage and do not only mitigate accidents by
automatic emergency braking or evasive maneuvers, but also Who should attend?
optimize the effectiveness of occupant protection systems. The seminar addresses all engineers, technicians and experts
Since the introduction of seat belt pre-tensioners and driver working in the development, application and research of
airbags in the early 80ies the requirements to crash sensors vehicle safety, both at automobile manufacturers and tier 1 / 2
and restraint control electronics have been increased continu- / 3 suppliers, system engineers, project engineers and project
ously: Starting with single point sensing and focus on frontal leaders in particular. Basically, all experts somehow dealing
crashes with full barrier overlap to trigger driver airbags and with vehicle safety and being interested in current and future
seat belt pre-tensioners, all real world accident types and sensor and actuator technologies in passive and active safety
crash severities must be discriminated today utilizing up to a are very welcome.
dozen peripheral crash satellites in order to control appropri-
ately up to two dozens of occupant protection devices. New
crash tests such as the lateral pole impact or the frontal small Course Contents
overlap crash mandated by regulations and consumer ratings Sensors for frontal-, rear and side impacts, roll-over,
have permanently tightened the requirements to crash sens- collisions w/ pedestrians & cyclists, occupant recognition
ing and smart restraint control. Above and beyond utilizing the & monitoring
Predictive (surround) sensors (radar, LiDAR, cameras,
predictive sensors of accident avoidance and advanced driver
assistance systems (ADAS), the protection of occupants can be ultrasonic)
Intelligent restraint control and triggering, artificial
increase significantly: protection devices can be pre-triggered
while a crash is imminent, and new protection measures are intelligence and neural networks
Structure and function of sensors and electronic control
possible. Last but not least the occupant protection can be
adapted and tailored to the occupant size, weight and position units, system-architectures
Today’s and future occupant protection systems,
(out-of-position) which will be particularly important in auton-
omous cars with variable seat positions and other new vehicle integrated safety
Dr. Lothar Groesch (Groesch Automotive Safety Consulting) For more then 44 years, Dr. Lo-
Instructor
thar Groesch has been working in vehicle safety, both passive (crash sensing and electronics, occupant pro-
tection) and active safety (surround sensors, accident avoidance). First of all working for 18 years for one of
the leading OEMs in vehicle safety, another 16 years followed in automotive safety sensors and electronics at
one of the major automotive suppliers. Working as a Product Director for Automotive Safety Systems in the US
from 2000 through 2009, he is particularly familiar with the specific requirements of the US market, legislation
and product liability. Since 2009, Dr. Groesch has been doing consulting business under the name Automotive
Safety Consulting with focus on driver assistance, accident avoidance and autonomous driving. Last but not
least, he is teaching automotive safety at several universities and has conducted numerous in-house seminars
about automotive safety.

Dates
87
SAFETY
WISSEN
UPDATE
MDB Side Impact Test Procedures according to UN R95, Euro NCAP

and IIHS
Requirement UN R95 Euro NCAP IIHS
Impact angle lateral 90°
MDB velocity 50 km/h 60 km/h 50 km/h
Barrier (MDB) EEVC AE-MDB IIHS
Mass 950 kg 1400 kg as of 2020 1500 kg
Ground clearance 300 mm 300 mm (bumper 350 mm) 379 mm (bumper 430 mm)
Upper edge height 800 mm 800 mm 1138 mm
Width 1500 mm 1700 mm 1676 mm
WS 50 % impact side,
Dummy front seat ES-2 impact side optional WS 50 % on far side SID IIs impact side
(dual occupancy test)
Q10 impact side
Dummy rear seat SID IIs impact side
Q6 far side
Head HPC < 1000
Chest VC < 1.0 m/s
 page 41 (Adults)
Protection Criteria Rib deflection D < 42 mm  page 53
 page 109 (Children)
Abdomen Σ APF < 2.5 kN
Pelvis PSPF < 6.0 kN
Pole Side Impact Tests according to Euro NCAP, UN R135, GTR 14,
FMVSS 214 and CMVSS 214
Requirement Euro NCAP UN R135 / GTR 14 FMVSS 214 / CMVSS 214 U.S. NCAP
Vehicle Velocity up to 32 km/h (26 km/h for
32 km/h up to 32 km/h 32 km/h
(on Flying Floor) vehicles up to 1.5 m width1)
Impact angle oblique 75° on fixed pole
Pole diameter 254 mm
WorldSID 50 % on impact side
ES-2 re or SID IIs (Build Level D) on impact
Dummy Euro NCAP: optional WS 50 % on far side SID IIs 5 % on impact side
side
(dual occupancy test)
SID IIs: HIC36 < 1000
Head HIC36 < 1000
Lower Spine Acc. < 82 g
Shoulder Flateral < 3.0 kN
Pelvis Force < 5.525 kN
Protection Chest deflection < 55 mm
 page 41 ES-2 re: HIC36 < 1000  page 48
Criteria Abdomen deflection < 65 mm
Chest deflection < 44 mm
Lower Spine Acc. < 75 g
Abdominal Force < 2.5 kN
PSPF < 3.36 kN
PSPF < 6 kN
Test Configuration WS 50 % SID IIs 5 %
GTR 14 only
1
88
SAFETY
WISSEN
MDB Side Impact Tests according to FMVSS 214, CMVSS 214 and
U.S. NCAP
Requirement FMVSS 214 / CMVSS 214 U.S. NCAP U.S. NCAP Upgrade1
Impact angle lateral 90°, 27° crab angle
53 ±1 km/h (33.5 mph)
Impact velocity 61.9 ±0.8 km/h (~55 km/h in 90° direction)
(~47 km/h in 90° direction)
Barrier NHTSA MDB
Mass 1368 kg
Ground clearance 279 mm (bumper 330 mm)
Upper edge height 838 mm
Width 1676 mm
Dummy front seat ES-2 re impact side ES-2 re impact side WorldSID 50 % (SBL F) impact side
Dummy rear seat SID IIs (Build Level D) impact side SID IIs (Build Level D) impact side SID IIs (Build Level D) impact side
SID IIs: HIC36 < 1000

Chest acceleration < 82 g
Pelvis force < 5.525 kN
Protection
ES-2 re: HIC36 < 1000  page 48 Criteria not yet defined
Criteria
Chest deflection < 44 mm
Abdominal force < 2.5 kN
Pelvis force < 6 kN
1
planned
27°
1/2
w
940
w
mm
w = Wheelbase
89
SAFETY
WISSEN
UPDATE
Seat Adjustments for Side Impact Tests ⑤
②
①
① ② ③ ④ ⑤ ⑥
Seat Fore/Aft Seat Height Seat Back Angle Head Restraint Head Restraint Seat Base Tilt
Height Fore/Aft
Euro NCAP manuf. design

mid + 20 mm lowest mid mid1 mid
MDB position or 23°
mid + 20 mm
Euro NCAP manuf. design
passenger3: lowest mid mid1 mid
Pole position or 23°
rearmost4
height of top surface
non-adjustable manuf. design level with
UN R95 mid mid mid
passenger seat position or 25° head COG or
or mid uppermost
uppermost or
manuf. design
UN R135 mid + 20 mm lowest manuf. design most rearward mid
position or 23°
position.
U.S. NCAP /
manuf. design „absolute“
FMVSS 214 mid lowest2 uppermost most forward
position or 25° mid2
ES-2re
U.S. NCAP /
most forward „absolute“
FMVSS 214 mid head at 0° lowest most forward
position mid2
SID-IIs
U.S. NCAP / manuf. design „absolute“

mid + 20 mm lowest2 uppermost most forward
WorldSID 50 position or 25° mid2
uppermost or
ISO manuf. design
mid + 20 mm lowest manuf. design
WorldSID 50 position or 23°
position.
1
If there is any interference with the rear of the dummy head, move the HR to the most rearward position.
2
Seat base tilt adjustment ⑥ has priority w. r. t. seat height adjustment ②.
3
For dual occupancy test to prove that interaction between driver and passenger in side impact is prevented
4
The head center of gravity must be no further rearward than the pole impact line
90
Active
Active
& & CAECAE Hybrid
Hybrid
& Full
& Full
Electric
Electric
Passive
Passive
Safety
Active &Safety Engineering
Engineering
CAE Vehicle
Vehicle
Hybrid Testing
& Full Testing
Electric
Passive Safety Engineering Vehicle Testing
Durability
Durability
& RG& RG System
System
& Component
& Component
Fleet
Fleet
Management
Management
Durability & RG Development
SystemDevelopment
& Component
Fleet Management Development
Type
Type
Approval
Approval
& & Turn-key
Turn-key Data
Data
Acquisition
Acquisition
Homologation
Homologation
Type Approval & Projects
Projects
Turn-key & Predictive
Data&Acquisition
Predictive
Homologation NVH
NVH Projects EuroEuro
NCAP
NCAP Product
Product
Behaviour
Behaviour
& Predictive
NVH Official
Official
EuroLaboratory
Laboratory
NCAP Product Behaviour
Official Laboratory
Testing
Testing
Inspection
Inspection
Testing
Certification
Certification China
China
| Germany
| Germany
| Poland
| Poland
| |
Inspection
Spain
Spain
| Turkey
| Turkey
| UAE
| UAE
Certification China | Germany | Poland |
Passive Safety
Side Impact - Requirements and Development Strategies

In addition to the frontal impact, the protection in a side The seminar addresses development engineers who are new
impact has a fixed place in the development of vehicles. in the field of side crash, or who have already gained some
Continuous aggravation of consumer tests and legal regula- experience in the field of safety, as well as developers of
tions, due to new pole tests (UN ECE R135 and U.S. NCAP), assemblies that have to fulfil a sidecrash-relevant function.
enhanced deformable barriers and the introduction of Furthermore it is also interesting for project managers and
World-SID Dummies (5 / 50%ile) with test specific measuring managers, who deal with side impact and who would like to
methods are causing a need to further improve side impact gain a deeper understanding of this topic in order to use it for
protection. In order to achieve this enhancement, it is neces- an improvement of procedures.
sary to get a much more profound understanding of the highly
complex phenomena and modes of action in a side impact Course Contents
which goes far beyond the simple application of additional Challenges of side impacts
airbags. The seminar provides a comprehensive overview of Explanation of the different measuring means,
today's standard test procedures including country-specific in particular the different dummies
variations, the legal regulations and the requirements of con- Overview of current test procedures and side impact
sumer protection as well as an outlook on changes in the near relevant protection criteria
future. In addition, tools, measuring methods and criteria, and Legal tests (FMVSS 214, UN ECE R95, UN ECE R135, ...)
virtual methods such as crash and occupant simulation, as well Other tests (Euro NCAP, U.S. NCAP, further NCAPs, IIHS,
as the analysis of the performance of the restraint systems will manufacturer specific tests)
be discussed. Furthermore it will be explained how a target- Development methods and tools:
oriented use of CAE-simulation and hardware tests can lead Crash and occupant simulation, range of application
to optimal passenger values, while at the same time obeying and limitations.
Analysis of the performance of protection and restraint
to boundary conditions such as costs, weight and time-to-
systems in side impact. Discussion of the boundary conditions,
market. A workshop with crash-data analysis finally deepens limits, conflicts and problems
the understanding. Development strategy for an optimal restraint system for
side impact
Target oriented use of CAE-simulation and hardware tests
to develop optimal occupant load values
Workshop with analysis of crash-data and discussion
of the results
Stephanie Wolter (BMW AG)

Instructors
studied engineering physics at the University of Applied Sciences Mu-

nich. Since 1995 she has been working at BMW AG in different functions in the field of side protection, such
as pre-development, development of side airbags and as a project engineer in various car lines. Moreover,
she represents BMW Group in various national and international bodies that deal with side impact and other
aspects of side protection, e. g. ISO Working Groups, etc.
Bart Peeters Weem (BMW AG) studied mechanical engineering at the University of Technology in
Eindhoven with focus on system and control. Since 2003 he has worked at BMW on passive safety develop-
ment. First as Simulation Engineer, later as team leader and project referent. Since 2015 he is head of the
development of full vehicle side impact protection for BMW 1-, 2- and 3-series, MINI and BMW-i. In 2019
he was elected as Pilot of the new ACEA-Expertgroup on virtual testing of passive safety.

Dates
23.-24.04.2020 28/3537 Gaimersheim 2 Days 1.340,- EUR till 26.03.2020, thereafter 1.590,- EUR
92
SAFETY
WISSEN
Side Impact Protection Criteria Compared

HIC15 [-] 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000
Euro NCAP MDB/Pole1 WS 50
JNCAP MDB WS 50
C-NCAP MDB WS 50
C-NCAP MDB SID 2s
IIHS MDB SID 2s
1
Pole: no sliding scale but capping only for HIC > 700
HPC [-] 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000
Please note that the values indicated in this graph may be rounded and that additional criteria may exist. Please take exact values and additional criteria from the tables for the respective regulation.
UN R95 MDB ES-2
HIC36 [-] 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000
UN R135 Pole WS 50
FMVSS 214 MDB/Pole ES-2/SID 2s
Head a3ms [g] 60 65 70 75 80 85 90 95
Euro NCAP MDB/Pole2 WS 50
C-NCAP MDB WS 50
2
Pole: no sliding scale but capping only for ares, peak > 80 g
Chest Compression [mm] 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55
UN R95 MDB ES-2
UN R135 Pole WS 50
FMVSS 214 MDB/Pole ES-2
Euro NCAP MDB/Pole WS 50
IIHS MDB SID 2s
C-NCAP MDB WS 50
JNCAP MDB WS 50
Shoulder Lateral Force [kN] 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
UN R135 Pole WS 50
C-NCAP/JNCAP MDB WS 50
Chest VCmax [m/s] 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4
UN R95 MDB ES-2
C-NCAP MDB WS 50
IIHS MDB SID 2s
Lower Spine a3ms [g] 0 25 50 75 100 125 150 175
UN R135 Pole WS 50
Abdomen Force [kN] 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5
UN R95 MDB ES-2
Abdomen Compression [mm] 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75
C-NCAP MDB WS 50
JNCAP MDB WS 50
PSPF [kN] 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
UN R95 MDB ES-2
UN R135 Pole WS 50
C-NCAP MDB WS 50
JNCAP MDB WS 50
Pelvis Force [kN] 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
FMVSS 214 MDB/Pole SID 2s
C-NCAP MDB SID 2s
Legend: Regulations: requirements are met / NCAP: maximum score
Regulations: requirements not met / NCAP: zero score
Linear interpolation of the score between the upper and lower limit 93
SAFETY
WISSEN
FMVSS 226, CMVSS 226 - Ejection Mitigation
Requirements:
At up to 4 impact test locations on each side window in the first 3 rows max. 100 mm
of seats the head excursion may not exceed 100 mm
Tests at two impact velocities: 16 km/h and 20 km/h
Head protection systems (e.g. curtain airbags) must be fired before
the impact: v = 16 km/h / 20 km/h
at 20 km/h with a time delay of 1.5 s prior to the impact
at 16 km/h with a time delay of 6 s prior to the impact
Tests are done without glazing or with pre-damaged glazing
pre-damage: perforation in a 75 mm grid pattern
Valid for vehicles with GVWR ≤ 4536 kg
Locating Targets: m = 18 kg
Front Row Window Rear Row Windows
Daylight Opening (DLO)

25 mm Offset
Primary- B3 B4
A4
Target
A3
Secondary- A1 A2 B1 B2
Target
1/3 1/3 1/3 1/3 1/3 1/3
Steps Front Row Window Rear Row Windows

1 Set Primary Target A1 in lower front corner Set Primary Target B3 in upper front corner
2 Set Primary Target A4 in upper rear corner Set Primary Target B2 in lower rear corner
3 Divide horizontal distance between A1 and A4 in thirds Divide horizontal distance between B3 and B2 in thirds
4 Move A3 at the first third vertically upward Move B1 at the first third vertically downward
5 Move A2 at the second third vertically downward Move B4 at the second third vertically upward
6 Measure Distances Dx (horizontal) and Dz (vertical) of the target center points
If Dx (A2 - A3) < 135 mm and Dz (A2 - A3) < 170 mm  Eliminate If Dx (B1 - B4) < 135 mm and Dz (B1 - B4) < 170 mm  Eliminate
7
A3 B4
If Dx (A4 - A3) (or A2 if A3 was eliminated in step 7) < 135 mm If Dx (B3 - B4) (or B1 if B4 was eliminated in step 7) < 135 mm
8
and Dz (A4 - A3/2) < 170 mm  Eliminate A3/2 and Dz (B3 - B4/1) < 170 mm  Eliminate B4/1
If Dx (A4 - A2) (or A3 if A2 was eliminated in step 8) < 135 mm If Dx (B2 - B1) (or B4 if B1 was eliminated in step 8) < 135 mm
9
and Dz (A4 - A2/3) < 170 mm  Eliminate A2/3 and Dz (B2 - B1/4) < 170 mm  Eliminate B1/4
If Dx (A1 - A4) < 135 mm and Dz (A1 - A4) < 170 mm  Eliminate If Dx (B3 - B2) < 135 mm and Dz (B3 - B2) < 170 mm  Eliminate
10
A4 B3
11 If only 2 targets remain: Measure absolute distance D the center points of the targets
12 If D > 360 mm, set additional 3rd target on the center of the line connecting the targets
If less than 4 targets remain, repeat steps 1-12 with the impactor rotated by 90 degrees. If this results in a higher number of
13
targets use the rotated targets.
If no target is found rotate the impactor in 5 degree steps, until it is possible to fit the impactor in the DLO-offset. Then place
14
the center of the target as close to the geometric center of the DLO as possible.
U.S. Test Procedure TP-226-00, Mar 2011 CAN. Test Procedure TSD-226 Rev. 0, Nov 2016
94
High Resolution High Speed Cameras
Crash Test insights with 1920 x 1080 @ 2500 frames / sec

With AOS you are always on the winner side
AOS Technologies AG Tel. +41 (0)56 483 34 88 Get results while others try!
Taefernstrasse 20 [email protected]
CH-5405 Baden-Daettwil www.aostechnologies.com
SAFETY
WISSEN
Head Impact on Vehicle Interiors
UN R21 UN R21, 01 Series, Supplement 3
Test Procedure
A pendulum equipped with a spherical impactor (165 mm) hits the interior parts in front of the driver and passenger
(side, pedal and steering wheel excluded) with a velocity of 24.1 km/h.
Protection Criteria
a3ms < 80 g; no failure of structure and sharp edges in impact zone
Pendulum test is not necessary, if it can be shown that there is no contact between head and the instru-
ment panel in case of a frontal impact.
This can be done by crash tests, sled tests and/or numerical occupant simulation.
(See app. 8 of UN R21)
Test Procedure TP-201U-02, Jan 2016

FMVSS 201U
Test Procedure
A Free Motion Headform (FMH) impactor hits the upper interior parts with a velocity of 24 km/h (A-, B-, C-pillar, roof
etc.).
FMH Impactor Data
Mass of FMH impactor: 4.54 kg
Head form according to SAE J 921 and J 977 including triaxial acceleration sensor.
Protection Criteria
HIC Calculation HIC = supt1,t2 t2-t1 < 36 ms; a [g]; t [s]
HIC value for FMH HIC(d) = 0.75446 HIC + 166.4

HIC(d) must not exceed 1000.
24 points defined for impact according Test Procedure TP-201U-02 (each side, left and right)
other pillars: OP 1, OP 2
upper roof: UR
RH
sliding door track: SD
roll bar: RB 1, RB 2 RP 1
stiffener / brace: ST 1, ST 2 / BT
SR 3
RP 2
BP 1
SR 2
FH 2 SR 1
FH 1 BP 2
AP 1
BP 3
AP 2
BP 4
AP 3
96
Passive Safety
Head Impact on Vehicle Interiors: FMVSS 201 and UN R21

To prevent injuries resulting from impacts of the occupants' This seminar is especially suited for engineers and technicians
heads on vehicle interior parts, these parts need to be who work on the development of vehicle interior parts and
designed in a way which allows sufficient deformation space who want to become familiar with the safety requirements
to reduce the loads on the head. Internationally there are two that are relevant for these parts.
important regulations regarding the design of interiors, such
as cockpits, roof and door liners: The U.S. FMVSS 201 and the
Regulation UN R21. Both regulations stipulate requirements Course Contents
concerning the maximum head acceleration or the HIC in Introduction
Rules and regulations concerning head impact
impacts on interior parts.
FMVSS 201
UN R21
The objective of this course is to provide an overview of the
Development tools
legal requirements and to show how these can be fulfilled. The Numerical simulation
focus of the seminar is on the development process and the Test
development tools and methods. In particular the interaction Workshop: Determination of impact locations in a vehicle
of testing and simulation will be described and different design Development process and methods
solutions will be discussed. Typical conflicts of objectives in the Solving of conflicts of objectives
design - e.g. to fulfil NVH requirements, static stiffness, or mis- Typical deformation paths, padding materials
use, while fulfilling the safety standards at the same time - are
addressed in this seminar. Examples of practical solutions will
be shown and discussed.
In addition, the development according to the head impact

requirements in the overall-context of vehicle development is
described in this seminar.
In a workshop exemplary head impact locations in a vehicle

interior and impact areas on a dashboard are determined.
Torsten Gärtner (Opel Automobile GmbH) has been working as a simulation expert since 1997.
Instructor
From numerous projects he has extensive experience in the field of occupant simulation and interior safety.
He is Technical Lead Engineer Safety Analytics at Opel Automobile GmbH. Before that he worked as depart-
ment manager for safety with TECOSIM GmbH and spent 10 years in various management positions with
carhs gmbh.

Date
97
EU Regulations Japan
Euro NCAP / ANCAP KNCAP UN R127 GTR
JNCAP 78/2009 and Article 18
U.S. NCAP8 C-NCAP KMVSS 102-2 No. 9
Test Procedures and Protection Criteria for Pedestrian Protection
Test Method Parameter 631/2009 Attachment 99

max. score zero score max. score zero score max. score zero score Phase 2
αA (°) 65 65 65 65 65 65 65
❶ VA (km/h) 40 40 40 35 35 35 35
Adult Headform
WAD (mm) 1700 (1500)1 - 2100 1700 - 2100 1700 - 2100 1700 - 210010 1700 - 210010 1700 - 210010 1700 - 2100
4.5 kg
Ø 165 mm on Windscreen yes yes yes no no no no
HPC/HIC (-) 650 1700 650 1700 650 1700 1000 / 17003 1000 / 17003 1000 / 17003 1000 / 17003
αC (°) 50 50 (202) 50 50 50 50 50
❷ VC (km/h) 40 40 40 35 35 35 35
Child Headform
WAD (mm) 1000 - 1700 (1500)1 1000 - 1700 1000 - 1700 1000 - 170010 10009 - 170010 1000 - 170010 1000 - 1700
3.5 kg
Ø 165 mm on Windscreen yes yes yes no no no no
HPC/HIC (-) 650 1700 650 1700 650 1700 1000 / 17003 1000 / 17003 1000 / 17003 1000 / 17003
αU (°) 90 w.r.t. IBRL4 - WAD 930
❸ VU (km/h) 20 - 33
Upper Legform
10.5 kg Sum of forces (kN) 5 kN 6 kN
Bending Moment (Nm) 285 Nm 350 Nm
Legform Flex PLI Flex PLI Flex PLI EEVC Flex PLI Flex PLI Flex PLI
VL (km/h) 40 40 (44)5 40 40 40 40 40
Ground clearance d (mm) 75 75 75 25 75 75 75
Acceleration (g) 170 (250)6
❹
Bending angle (°) 19
Lower Legform7
Shearing (mm) 6
Tibia Bending (Nm) 282 340 202 306 282 340 340 (380)6 340 (380)6 340 (380)6
MCL Elongation (mm) 19 22 14.8 19,8 19 22 22 22 22
ACL/PCL Elongation (mm) 10 10 0 13 10 10 13 13 13
VL (km/h) 40 40 40 40 40 40
❺
Upper Legform7 Sum of forces (kN) 5 6 5 7.5 / 611 7.5 7.5 7.5 7.5
9.5 kg
Bending Moment (Nm) 285 350 300 / 28511 510 / 35011 510 510 510 510
1
Points to be tested that lie between WAD 1500 and 1700 are tested with child-/small 6 In an area no wider than 264 mm.
adult headform impactor, if the points are on the moveable/hinged bonnet top. Other- 7 For vehicles with a lower bumper height < 425 mm the lower legform test ❹ is
wise the adult headform is used. applied. For vehicles with a lower bumper height ≥ 500 mm the upper legform
2 Between "Blue Line" and 1000 mm test ❺ is applied. For vehicles with a lower bumper height ≥ 425 mm an < 500
3 The HPC shall not exceed 1000 over one half of the child headform test area and, in mm the impactor is at the choice of the manufacturer.
addition, shall not exceed 1 000 over 2/3 of the combined child and adult headform 8
Proposed U.S. NCAP rating
WISSEN
SAFETY
test areas. The HPC for the remaining areas shall not exceed 1700 for both headforms. 9 Minimum 82.5 mm rearward of Bonnet Leading Edge
4 IBRL = Internal Bumper Reference Line 10
Maximum 82.5 mm forward of Bonnet Rear Reference Line
98
5 Test velocity will be increased when leg impact is introduced in legal test. 11
C-NCAP
Passive Safety
The PraxisConference Pedestrian Protection is held every June or July with about 170
participants, including delegates from all major OEMs. It is the world’s largest expert meet-
ing in the field of pedestrian protection. The intensive discussions at the info-points and
between the presentations show that the participants value the innovative conference
concept. Highlights of the event are the demonstrations in the laboratory of Germany’s
Federal Highway Research Institute and the OEM’s presentations of pedestrian protecting
solutions implemented in current car models.
Although the industry has been working on pedestrian protection for many years now, the
constant development of the requirements (regulations and NCAP) continuously raises
new questions that will be answered during this conference.
Expert speakers provide concentrated information regarding current and future require-
ments, latest research findings and technical solutions. Both, testing and numerical simula-
tion are covered in the conference presentations.
In addition to this the conference offers hands-on praxis session in the laboratory. Here,
test equipment and impactors are demonstrated and explained in detail. The preparation,
execution and analysis of pedestrian impact tests are shown in live demonstrations.
Conference Topics:
Current status and future development of the regulations (UN R127, GTR 9)
Global consumer protection requirements for pedestrian protection
Future development of impactors (e.g. aPLI)
Pedestrian, Cyclist and PTW AEB systems
Pedestrian safety technologies (active bonnets, airbags)
Test equipment
Who should attend?

The PraxisConference is suited for pedestrian protection experts from throughout the
industry. Even beginners will find the event an excellent opportunity to quickly acquire
theoretical and practical knowledge and become part of the expert community.
DATE 24.-25. June 2020 Co-hosted with

FACTS
HOMEPAGE www.carhs.de/pkf
VENUE Bundesanstalt für Straßenwesen, Brüderstraße 53, 51427 Bergisch Gladbach
PRICE 1.490,- EUR till 27.05.2020, thereafter 1.750,- EUR BGS Böhme & Gehring GmbH
99
SAFETY
WISSEN
Pedestrian Protection
Pedestrian Protection Test Procedures Where the bonnet leading edge reference Points to be tested that lie between WAD
in Euro NCAP / ANCAP line (BLERL) is located between WAD 930 1500 und 1700 are tested with child-/small
mm and WAD 1000 mm, an additional test adult headform impactor, if the points are on
with the child headform will be performed the moveable/hinged bonnet top. Otherwise
on the BLERL at a speed of 40 km/h under the adult headform is used.
Protocol Version 8.5
20°. Adult Headform Impactor
TB019 V 1.0 4.5 kg
Child-/small Adult Headform Impactor
❶
3.5 kg
❸ ❷
40 k
m/h
Upper Legform 2100 mm
65°
Impactor
40
Legform Impactor
km
1700 mm
/h
Flex PLI 50° 1500 mm
❹ 1000 mm
930 mm
775 mm
40 km/h
IBRL
Bumper
Beam
Upper Legform
Impactor for SUV
❺ 75 mm
Pedestrian Protection Test Procedures according to

UN R127.02 Adult Headform Impactor
4.5 kg
UN R127.02 Child Headform Impactor
❶
3.5 kg
❷
35 k
m/h
82.5 mm forward of bonnet

65° rear ref. line/
35
max. 2100 mm
km
Legform Impactor 1700 mm / max. 82.5 mm

/h
Flex PLI 50° forward of bonnet rear

ref. line
❹ 1000 mm / min. 82.5 mm
rearward of Bonnet
Leading Edge
Upper Legform
Impactor for SUV
❺ 75 mm
100
AGEMEN
MAN T
SI M U
NG
LA
THE ROAD IS
TI
TI
N
ES
T
THERE FOR EVERYONE!

From virtual analysis to validation in our test centre:
we are making the roads that little bit safer for pedestrians.
Single-source pedestrian protection function Contact

development: one partner for the customer EDAG Engineering GmbH
[email protected]
Cars arouse emotions in us. For all sorts of reasons. Sometimes
it‘s the colour, sometimes the shape, sometimes performance,
and sometimes safety. fgs.edag.com
From our experience as the world‘s leading independent engi-
neering service provider, we know that vehicle safety is of key
importance when developing complete vehicles.
We offer all the services relevant to pedestrian protection, from
project management and simulation through to testing in our
fully equipped test facilities. At many sites, and also close to you.
Are you interested in finding out how our experience can help
you create both function and emotion?
Then ask us.
edag.com
SAFETY
WISSEN
UPDATE
Euro NCAP / ANCAP Pedestrian Protection:

Head and Leg Impact Grid Method
Head Impact UBRL
Between WAD 1000 and WAD 2100 impact points are located
on a fixed 100 mm grid, the selection of "Worst Case" points WAD
by the test institute is no longer required. The manufacturer 775
WAD
provides a result prediction (points) for the Grid-Points. Euro 1000
NCAP verifies 10 randomly selected points, the manufacturer
can nominate up to 10 additional randomly selected points. A
tolerance of 10 % is applied to the verification tests, i.e. even if
the actual HIC is 10 % above or below the margins of the pre- WAD
dicted score, the predicted score is applied. At the verification 1500
points the actual test result is divided by the manufacturer‘s WAD

1700
prediction. This so called correction factor is applied to all the
grid points to obtain the final score:
Actual tested score WAD
= Correction Factor 2100
Predicted score
Per Grid-Point 0 - 1 points are available according to the fol-
lowing scheme: Total Score:
The total score will be calculated as follows:
HIC15 < 650 1.00 Point ∑Predicted Score x Correction Factor
650 ≤ HIC15 < 1000 0.75 Points + ∑Default Scores
+ ∑Scores from Blue Zones
1000 ≤ HIC15 < 1350 0.50 Points = Total
1350 ≤ HIC15 < 1700 0.25 Points ÷ Number of Grid Points
= Percentage of max. achievable score
1700 ≤ HIC15 0.00 Points x 24 (Maximum achievable score)
= Total Score for Headform Test
„Default“ Results Leg Impact
Grid points on the A-pillars are defaulted to red = 0 points. For leg impact a 100 mm grid on WAD 775 (Upper Legform)
Grid points on the windscreen that have distance of more than respectively on Upper Bumper Reference Line (Flex PLI Leg-
165 mm from the windscreen base are defaulted to green = form) is used. Euro NCAP selects either the centerline point or
1 point. Defaulted locations are not included in the random an adjacent point as a starting point for testing. Starting from
selection of verification tests. Where the vehicle manufacturer this position every second grid point will be tested. Symmetry
can provide evidence that shows an A-pillar is not red, those is applied across the vehicle. Grid points that have not been
grid points will be considered in the same way as other points. tested will be awarded the worst result from one of the adja-
cent points. Manufacturers may sponsor additional test for
Unpredictable Grid Locations: Blue Zones those points that are not tested (in advance). Per Grid point
In the following areas up to 1 point is awarded. For the Upper Legform the score is
Plastic scuttle
based upon the worst performing parameter (Sum of Forces /
Windscreen wiper arms and windscreen base
Bending moment). For the Legform the 1 point per grid point
Headlamp glazing
is divided into two independent assessment areas of equal
Break-away structures
weight (0.5 Pts. / each): Tibia moments and ligament elonga-
the manufacturer may define a "blue zone“ consisting of up tions.
to 2 adjacent grid points, for which no prediction is made. A
maximum of eight zones may be blue over the entire head- Total Score:
form impact area. The total score for the Upper/Lower Legform tests will be
The laboratory will choose one blue point to assess each zone. calculated as follows:
The test results of blue points will be applied to all the grid ∑Scores of all Grid Points
point(s) in each zone. ÷ Number of Grid Points
Assessment Protocol Version 10.0.2 = Percentage of max. achievable score
x 6 (Maximum achievable score)
Testing Protocol Version 8.5 = Total Score for Legform Test
102 more about the impactors  page 124
Passive Safety
Pedestrian Protection - Development Strategies

Euro NCAP annually adjusts details in its pedestrian rating Introduction with an overview of current requirements
protocols and even U.S. NCAP plans to introduce a pedestrian regarding pedestrian protection
protection assessment. Stricter injury criteria, modified test- Legal requirements (EU, UN Regulations, Japan, GTR)
ing areas and the testing of vehicles that were previously not Consumer tests (e. g. Euro NCAP, U.S. NCAP, JNCAP, KNCAP)
tested because of their weight, require the thorough knowl- Presentation and discussion of the design and application
edge of the requirements and a strict implementation of the of the impactors
Leg impactors (Flex PLI, Upper Legform, aPLI)
requirements in the development process. In the introduction
Head impactors (Child head, Adult head)
the seminar informs about the different impactors that are
Methods in numerical simulation, testing and system
used for pedestrian safety testing. Thereafter the various
development
requirements (regulations and consumer tests) are explained
Requirements on the design of vehicle front ends for
and compared. The focus of the seminar is on the develop-
pedestrian protection
ment strategy: Which decisions have to be taken in which
Development strategy
development phase? What are the tasks and priorities of the Interaction between simulation and testing
person in charge of pedestrian protection? As a background, Integration in the vehicle development process
ideas and approaches towards the design of a vehicle front Solutions to fulfill the requirements
end in order to meet the pedestrian protection requirements Passive solutions
are discussed. In addition to that, the seminar explains how Active solutions (active bonnets, airbags)
the function of active bonnets can be proven by means of
numerical simulation. This includes both, the pedestrian
detection that need to be proven with various impactors or
human models, as well as the proof that the bonnet is fully
deployed at the time of impact.
Who should attend?

The seminar is intended for development, project or simula-
tion engineers working in the field of vehicle safety, dealing
with the design of motor vehicles with regard to pedestrian
protection.
Maren Finck (carhs.training gmbh) is a Project Manager at carhs.training gmbh. From 2008 - 2015
Instructor
she worked at EDAG as a project manager responsible for passive vehicle safety.
Previously, she worked several years at carhs GmbH and TECOSIM as an analysis engineer with a focus on
pedestrian safety and biomechanics.

Date
17.02.2020 152/3576 Gaimersheim 1 Day 790,- EUR till 20.01.2020, thereafter 940,- EUR
104
SAFETY
WISSEN
UPDATE
Whiplash Requirements Front Seats

IIHS/
FMVSS
Requirement Euro NCAP IIWPG/ JNCAP C-NCAP ANCAP KNCAP
202a
C-IASI
Applicable in
Option static dynamic

Geometrical
Measurements     
Backset     
Horizontal Load App.
(Backward Displacement) 
Vertical Load App.

STATIC REQUIREMENTS
(Height Retention)
Integrated/Fixed HR, no
Height Lock Modifier 
Minimum Height 
Minimum Width  
Gaps 
Energy Absorption
(Pendulum Test) 
Head Interference Space of
Head Restraint 
ATD H III BioRID BioRID BioRID BioRID BioRID BioRID
Delta Theta 
HIC15 
Head Contact Time HCT 1   
Head Rebound Velocity 1
 
Upper Neck Force Fx+      
Upper Neck Force Fz+      
NIC     
DYNAMIC REQUIREMENTS
Nkm 1  
T1 Acceleration 1   
Seatback Deflection Angle 1
 
Dummy Artefact Modifier  
Seat Track Dynamic
Displacement 
Upper Neck Tension Fz +
UN Momentum My 
Lower Neck Force Fx+ 1  
Lower Neck Force Fz+  
Upper Neck
Momentum My 1
 
Lower Neck
Momentum My 1  
This table is based on material generated by: LEAR Whiplash Applied Research Group
1
Capping only
105
SAFETY
WISSEN
UPDATE
Euro NCAP / ANCAP Rear Seat Whiplash Assessment

Testing Protocol Version 1.1
① ΔIP X ① Effective Height Heff requirements for the headrest:
in highest position ≥ 770 mm
and
in worst case position ≥ 720 mm
IP
Calculation of Heff:
eff
Heff= ΔIP X · sin (Torso-Angle) + ΔIP Z · cos (Torso-Angle)

H
ΔIP Z
IP: Intersection Point
Determination of IP X and IP Z:
IP X = 88.5 · sin (Torso-Angle - 2.6) + 5 + CP X
H-Point IP Z = uppermost intersection of the headrest contour in the
seat centerline with a vertical line through IP X
② Backset ΔCP X requirements for the headrest

in mid position
and
in worst case position:
ΔCP X
ΔCP X ≤ 7.128 · Torso-Angle + 153
② CP CP: Contact Point
203 mm
③ Requirements for the non-use position of the headrest:

1) Automatic Return Head Restraint, or
2) > 60° rotation of the headrest in non-use position, or
504.5mm · cos(Torso-Angle - 2.6)
ΔCP Z
3) Δ Torso-Angle use / non-use > 10°, or

4) Height of lower edge of the headrest HLE:
250 mm ≤ HLE ≤ 460 mm
with HLE = ΔX · sin (Torso-Angle) + ΔZ · cos (Torso-Angle),
or
5) Thickness of the lower edge of the headrest S ≥ 40 mm
Score if the Requirements (see above) are met:

H-Point The outboard seating positions of rear seating rows are assessed.
Any centre seating position needs to comply with the requirements
of UN R17.08.
③ Parameter Points per seat
S ① Heff 1.5
② ΔCP Xmid 1*
LE
H
② ΔCP Xworstcase 0.5*

H-Point
③ Non-Use 1*
max. total 4
Scaling 1/8n (n = number of seats)
* only if Heff requirements are met
106
SAFETY
WISSEN
UPDATE
Euro NCAP / ANCAP Front Seat Whiplash Assessment 2020

Assessment Protocol Version 9.1.1 Testing Protocol Version 4.1
Dynamic Assessment
Whiplash Test Medium Severity Pulse High Severity Pulse
Higher Limit Lower Limit Capping Limit Higher Limit Lower Limit Capping Limit
NIC 11.00 24.00 27.00 13.00 23.00 25.50
Nkm 0.69 0.78
Rebound velocity (m/s) 5.2 6.0
Upper Neck Fx,shear(+ve) (N) 30 190 290 30 210 364
Upper Neck Fx,shear(-ve) (N) 360 360
Upper Neck Fz,tension (N) 360 750 900 470 770 1024
Upper Neck My,extension+flexion (Nm) 30 30
Lower Neck Fx,shear(ABS) (N) 360 360
Lower Neck My,extension+flexion (Nm) 30 30
T1 acceleration (g) 15.55 17.80
T-HRC (ms) 92 92
Seatback Deflection (°) 32
* All parameters, except rebound velocity, are calculated until THRC-end (= End of Head Restraint Contact Time).
If the Higher Performance Limit is reached, 1 point is awarded per criterion. A sliding scale is used between Higher and Lower
Performance Limit (1 .... 0 points). If the capping limit is exceeded by one criterion, the entire test is rated with zero points.
Modifiers
Seatback Dynamic Deflection A -3 point modifier will be applied where the seat has a dynamic deflection ≥ 32° in the high
severity pulse test.
Dummy Artefact Loading A -2 point modifier will be applied as a means of penalizing any seat that, by design, places
unfavorable loading on other body areas or exploits a dummy artefact.
Static Assessment
Head Restraint Geometry Head Restraint Geometry
in Test Position (mid range locking position) in Worst Case Position (= lowest & rearmost)
Higher Limit Lower Limit Limit
Score +1 Point -1 Point +1/n Points per front seat (n = number of front seats)
Effective Height (mm) 825 755 > 790
Backset (mm) < 45 ≥ 45 < 70
The assessments are based on the worst performing parameter from either the height or backset.
Overall Rating
For the overall rating the total of max. 8 points (3 per pulse + 1 Geometry + 1 Worst Case Geometry) is scaled by the factor 0.375
to a maximum of 3 points and is part of the Adult Occupant Protection rating.
Static Geometry Assessment by IIWPG / IIHS RCAR Version 3 (Mar 2008)
Backset - Distance between the back IIHS Version V (Dec 2019)

surface of the HRMD and the front
surface of the head restraint (cm) Measurement of the head restraint position
by a „Head Restraint Measuring Device“
(HRMD) and rating as Good, Acceptable,
Good Marginal or Poor.
Acceptable
Marginal International Insurance Whiplash Prevention
Poor Group (IIWPG)
Distance between the height probe

of the HRMD and the top of the
head restraint (cm)
Learn more about IIHS‘s static and
dynamic assessment  page 52
107
Passive Safety
Whiplash Testing and Evaluation in Rear Impacts
Course Description ment of whiplash injuries within the framework of consumer

In real-world accidents, distortions of the cervical spine or information have in common, that the protection effect in a
so-called whiplash injuries following a rear impact are among rear-end impact needs to be examined in an isolated vehicle
the most expensive injuries for the insurance industry. seat by means of a sled test using a generic acceleration pulse.
About 75 % of all injury costs of the insurers are caused by It turns out to be problematic, however, that presently there
whiplash injuries in highly-motorized countries. About 80 is no traumato-mechanical explanation of the phenomenon
% of all injuries in a rear impact are whiplash-injuries. This is “whiplash injury” and that all the currently discussed dummy
why this type of injury - even though it is neither very serious criteria with the respective limit values follow a so-called
nor lethal - has reached a high priority in the endeavors to “black-box approach”. Experts try to correlate the measured
develop test procedures and assessment criteria which help dummy criteria with the findings from accident data and to
in designing constructive measures in the car in order to avoid thus derive limit values. In this context the available dummy-
this type of injury. As an introduction, this seminar refers to technology with the different measuring devices and criteria,
the different accident data for whiplash injuries, which offer as well as the proposed limit values are going to be presented.
many realizations but no consistent pattern with regard to In the last part of the seminar different seat design concepts
the biomechanical injury mechanisms. However, some orga- (energy-absorbing, respectively geometry-improving), sub-
nizations - mainly from the field of consumer information and divided into active and passive systems will be introduced, and
insurance institutes - are working on the development of test their advantages and disadvantages will be discussed.
procedures and assessment criteria. The most active ones are
Thatcham (UK) and IIHS (USA) which are united in the group Who should attend?
IIWPG (International Insurance Whiplash Prevention Group), The seminar addresses development engineers who are new
SNRA and Folksam (Sweden) and the German ADAC. In 2008 in the field of rear impacts or who have already got some
Euro NCAP has introduced a whiplash test procedure as part experience in the field of safety, as well as developers of sub-
of its rating system. In 2014 an additional static assessment assemblies which have to fulfill a crash-relevant function. It is
for the rear seats was added. In 2020 Euro NCAP applies a furthermore especially interesting for project managers and
new Whiplash assessment on front seats. Where concepts managers who deal with the topic of rear-end impacts and
and methods from the future legal requirement the Global who would like to obtain a better knowledge of this subject in
Technical Regulation No. 7 Phase II (Head Restraints) can be order to use it for an improvement of procedures.
recognized. The Euro NCAP assessment will be explained in
detail in the seminar. Furthermore, the EEVC working group
20 is active as a consulting authority concerning whiplash Course Contents
injuries for the legislation in Europe. The Global Technical Introduction into the characteristics of a rear-end impact
Overview of the most important whiplash requirements
Regulation No. 7 Phase I (Head Restraints, short GTR 7) is
Injury criteria
unsatisfactory from the European point of view. Therefore the
Dummy-technology for rear impacts
United Nations work on a second phase of this regulation. The
Presentation of the Euro NCAP and FMVSS 202-dynamic
content of the GTR 7 Phase II gives the legal base for the future
HR development requirements. The focus of this work is on test procedures
Outlook on possible harmonization-tendencies
improving the BioRID dummy and on the definition of so called
Explanation of the possible design measures in car seats
Seat Performance Criteria. All discussions about the assess-
Thomas Frank (LEAR Corporation GmbH) joined the passive safety department of LEAR Corpora-
Instructor
tion in 2002 after graduating from the Technical University of Berlin in physical engineering sciences. At LEAR
Thomas Frank initially worked as a test engineer in crash testing, later he developed head rests. Today he is
expert for head restraints and low speed rear impact safety. In his position he guides the seat development
with respect to meet whiplash protection requirements in regulations and consumer tests.

Date
108
SAFETY
WISSEN
UPDATE
Euro NCAP / ANCAP Child Occupant Protection

Test Protocol Version 7.3 Assessment Protocol Version 7.3
Dynamic Assessment
Testing:
Q6: The Q6 dummy shall be seated in an appropriate CRS for a six year old child or a child with a stature of 125 cm. This will be either the CRS recommended by
the vehicle manufacturer, or if there is no recommendation, a suitable CRS from the top pick list.
Q10: The Q10 dummy shall be seated on a booster cushion only. This will be the booster cushion recommended by the vehicle manufacturer. Where the vehicle
manufacturer recommends a high back booster with detachable backrest it will be used without backrest. If there is no recommendation for a booster cushion,
one will be chosen by Euro NCAP from a list of suitable options contained in the Technical Bulletin TB012.
Preconditions: Where any of the following events occur zero points will be awarded to the dummy.
Frontal impact: During the forwards movement of the dummy only, the diagonal belt slips off the shoulder.
Frontal impact: The pelvis of the dummy submarines beneath the lap section of the belt or the lap section does not prevent the dummy from moving upwards
during rebound and is no longer restraining the pelvis.
Frontal and side impacts: The dummy pelvis does not remain in the booster seat / cushion and is not correctly restrained by the lap section of the seatbelt.
Frontal and side impacts: CRS does not remain within the same seating position or is no longer correctly restrained by the adult belt.
Frontal and side impacts: There is any breakage or fracturing of load-bearing parts of the belt system including buckles, webbing and anchorage points.
Frontal and side impacts: There is any breakage or fracturing of any seat belt lock-offs, tethers, straps, ISOFIX anchorages or any other attachments which are
specifically used to anchor the CRS to the vehicle fail.
Modifier: If, during the forwards movement of the dummy, the diagonal belt moves into the gap between the clavicle and upper arm with folding of the belt
webbing, a penalty of -4 points will be applied to the overall dummy score of the impact in which it occurs.
Frontal Impact (MPDB)
4 HIC151 ≤ 500; a3ms ≤ 60 g
0 + Capping HIC151 ≥ 700; a3ms ≥ 80 g
Head
-2 (Modifier2) Head forward excursion > 450 mm
Q6 / -4 (Modifier) Head forward excursion > 550 mm
Q10 2 Fz ≤ 1.7 kN
Upper Neck
max. 24 points
0 Fz ≥ 2.62 kN; My ≥ 36 (Q6) / 49 (Q10) Nm

2 a3ms ≤ 41 g (Q10); Deflection ≤ 30 mm (Q6)
Chest
max. 49 points
0 + Capping3 a3ms ≥ 55 g (Q10); Deflection ≥ 42 mm (Q6)

Side Impact (MDB)
2 HIC151 ≤ 500, a3ms ≤ 60 g
Head
0 + Capping HIC151 ≥ 700 (capping: 800), a3ms ≥ 80 g
Q6 / 1 Fres < 2.4 kN (Q6); Fres < 2.2 kN (Q10)
Upper Neck
Q10 0 Fres ≥ 2.4 kN (Q6); Fres ≥ 2.2 kN (Q10)
1 a3ms < 67 g
Chest
0 a3ms ≥ 67 g
Installation of CRS
Universal CRS points 4
max. 12 pt.
ISOFIX CRS points 2

i-Size CRS points 4
manufacturer recommended CRS points 2
Vehicle Based Assessment
Preconditions:
Provision of three-point seat belts on all passenger seats
Tables in the vehicle handbook stating clearly, which seating positions are suitable or not suitable for Universal / ISOFIX / i-Size CRS
Where a passenger frontal airbag is fitted (both front and rear seats if applicable), the CRS tables in the vehicle handbook must clearly indicate that when these
passenger airbags are active the seat is NOT suitable for any rearward facing CRS.
Compatibility of the 2nd row outboard seats with Gabarit according to points 1
UN ECE R16 Annex 17 - Appendix 1
Compatibility of all other passenger seats with Gabarit according to points 1
UN ECE R16 Annex 17 - Appendix 1
max. 13 points
2 seats with i-Size & TopTether marking (for ISO/B2 i-Size fixture defined in UN ECE
points 2
R16 sup. 9)
3 independent seats with i-Size and TopTether marking points 1
2 or more seating positions are suitable for fully independent use with the largest points 1
size of rearward facing (Class C) ISOFIX CRS, Fixture (CRF) ISO/R3,
passenger airbag warning marking and manual / automatic disabling points 2/4
integrated CRS points 1 (1 CRS) / 3 (2 or more CRS)
1
HIC15 is only applied if there is hard head contact, otherwise the score is based on a3ms only
2
Q10 only
capping applied for Q10 a3ms only 109
3
SAFETY
WISSEN
UPDATE
Latin NCAP Child Occupant Protection Protocol 2020 V1.1.0

Requirements for points for Child Protection Rating: Child seats (CRS) for 11/2 & 3 y/o children must be recommended by the vehicle manufacturer. CRS must be
available for purchase from dealers in the 3 big Latin NCAP markets (AR, BR, MX) and in every other market where the vehicle is sold. CRS must be available at the
3 most important cities of each of the 3 big markets in at least 2 retailers per city. CRS manufacturer must be officially represented in each of the 3 big markets.
Dynamic Assessment Dummy Q1½ Q3
Requirements for Points in Dynamic Assessments: no partial or full ejection of child dummy out of CRS / CRS must not be partially or wholly unre-
strained by any of the vehicle interfaces
Head Contact with the vehicle: any head contact with the vehicle results in 0 points for the head performance
Frontal Impact
Head points 4 0 4 0
no head contact with CRS no direct evidence + Head ares peak < 80 < 96
g
head contact with CRS Head ares 3ms ≤ 72 ≥ 88 ≤ 87 ≥ 100
worst score from
max. 16 points
Forward Facing CRS points 4 0 4 0

forward head excursion relative to Cr point mm ≤ 549 ≥ 550 ≤ 549 ≥ 550
Rearward Facing CRS points 4 0 4 0
no compressive load on top of head, head no no
head exposure exposure exposure
fully contained within CRS exposure exposure
points 2 0 2 0
Neck upper Neck Fz kN ≤ 1.7 ≥ 2.62 ≤ 1.7 ≥ 2.62
Chest ares 3ms g ≤ 41 ≥ 55 ≤ 50 ≥ 66
Side Impact
max. 8 points
max. 49 points
Requirements for Points in Side Impact: head containment within shell of CRS, also there must be no fracturing of the CRS
Head points 4 0 4 0
g
Installation of CRS
CRS from the reference list points 10
12
CRS recommended by the manufacturer points 2

if any passenger seat is not equipped with a 3 point belt 0 points
provision of three-point seat belts
are awarded for the vehicle based assessment
compatibility of all passenger seats with Gabarit according to UN ECE R16.05 points 2
3 seating positions that can simultaneously accommodate any reference list CRS points 1
3 seating positions that can simultaneously accommodate i-Size CRS points 1
max. 13 points
2 passenger seats equipped with ISOFIX according to UN ECE R14 points 1

+ these 2 passenger seats meet i-Size requirements points +1
2 seating positions comply with requirements for largest
points 1
size of rearward facing ISOFIX seats
no passenger airbag points 2
passenger airbag warning and disabling points max. 4
1 integrated CRS points 1
1 integrated “Group I-III” CRS points 1
ASEAN NCAP Child Occupant Protection 2021 - 2025 Protocol Version 2.0
Dynamic Assessment: Frontal Impact Dummy Q1½ Q3
Head points 4 0 4 0
g
worst score from
max. 16 points
Forward Facing CRS points 4 0 4 0

forward head excursion relative to Cr point mm ≤ 549 ≥ 550 ≤ 549 ≥ 550
Rearward Facing CRS points 4 0 4 0
no compressive load on top of head, head no no
max. 51 points
head exposure exposure exposure exposure exposure

fully restrained within CRS
points 2 0 2 0
Neck upper Neck Fz kN ≤ 1.7 ≥ 2.62 ≤ 1.7 ≥ 2.62
Chest ares 3ms g ≤ 41 ≥ 55 ≤ 50 ≥ 66
Dynamic Assessment: Side Impact
max. 8 pt.
Head points 4 0 4 0
g
Installation of CRS
2 13 12

Child Presence Detection
110 more about Latin NCAP  page 57 & ASEAN NCAP  page 61
SAFETY
WISSEN
KNCAP Child Occupant Protection Protocol 2019

4 HIC15 < 500; a3ms < 60 g
Head1 0 HIC15 ≥ 700 ; a3ms ≥ 80 g
-4 Modifier: Head forward excursion ≥ 550 mm
Q6 2 My,extension < 36 Nm; Fz,tension < 1.7 kN
Neck2
0 My,extension ≥ 36 Nm; Fz,tension ≥ 2.62 kN
max. 16 points
Chest
4 HIC15 < 500; a3ms < 60 g;
Head1 0 HIC15 ≥ 700 ; a3ms ≥ 80 g;
-2 / -4 Modifier: Head forward excursion ≥ 450 mm / 550 mm
Q10 2 My,extension < 49 Nm; Fz,tension < 1.7 kN
Neck2
0 My,extension ≥ 49 Nm; Fz,tension ≥ 2.62 kN
2 a3ms < 41 g
max. 32 points scaled down to 8 points in the overall rating

Chest
0 a3ms ≥ 55 g
Barrier Side Impact (AE-MDB) @ 55 km/h
4 HIC15 < 500; a3ms < 60 g
Head1
0 HIC15 ≥ 700 ; a3ms ≥ 80 g
2 Fz,tension < 2.4 kN
Q6 Neck
0 Fz,tension ≥ 2.4 kN
max. 16 points
2 a3ms < 67 g
Chest
0 a3ms ≥ 67 g
4 HIC15 < 500; a3ms < 60 g;
Head 1
0 HIC15 ≥ 700 ; a3ms ≥ 80 g;
2 Fz,tension < 2.2 kN
Q10 Neck
0 Fz,tension ≥ 2.2 kN
2 a3ms < 67 g
Chest
0 a3ms ≥ 67 g
If, during the forwards movement of the dummy, the diagonal belt moves into
the gap between the clavicle and upper arm with folding of the belt webbing,
Modifier -4
a penalty of -4 points will be applied to the overall dummy score of the impact
in which it occurs.
Preconditions: Where any of the following events occur, zero points will be awarded to the dummy.
Frontal impact: During the forwards movement of the dummy only, the diagonal belt slips off the shoulder.
Frontal impact: The pelvis of the dummy submarines beneath the lap section of the belt or the lap section does not
prevent the dummy from moving upwards during rebound and is no longer restraining the pelvis.
Frontal and side impacts: The dummy pelvis does not remain in the booster seat / cushion and is not correctly
restrained by the lap section of the seatbelt.
Frontal and side impacts: CRS does not remain within the same seating position or is no longer correctly restrained by
the adult belt.
Frontal and side impacts: There is any breakage or fracturing of load-bearing parts of the belt system including buckles,
webbing and anchorage points.
Frontal and side impacts: There is any breakage or fracturing of any seat belt lock-offs, tethers, straps, ISOFIX ancho-
rages or any other attachments which are specifically used to anchor the CRS to the vehicle fail.
1
In the absence of hard contacts the score is based on a3ms only.
2
In the absence of hard contacts the score is based on neck tension force only.
111
SAFETY
WISSEN
UPDATE
RCAR Insurance Tests

Lowspeed Structural Crash Tests Protocol Version 2.3 (Oct 2017)
Front
Vehicle width (front)
40 % Overlap
R = 150 mm 15 km/h
75Kg
10°
Rear
R = 150 mm
R=50mm
Vehicle Width Mobile Barrier
15 km/h
15 km/h
40 %
10°
Mobile Barrier
Barrier height Ground clearance
(700 mm+/-10 mm) (200 mm +/- 10 mm)
Bumper Test Protocol Version 2.1 (Feb 2018)
15 %
5 km/h 5 km/h
10 km/h 10 km/h
75Kg
Vehicle Width at Front Axle
Barrier ground clearance measured from the track surface to the lower surface of the bumper barrier:
Test Ground Clearance Remarks
Front 100 % 455±3 mm
Rear 100 % 405±3 mm or 455±3 mm EU and Asia (AZT ...) 405 mm, USA (IIHS) 455 mm
Front / Rear 15 % 405±3 mm or 455±3 mm Asia (IAG ...) and USA (IIHS) 405 mm
112
SAFETY
WISSEN
UNECE Vehicle Classification

Consolidated Resolution on the Construction of Vehicles (R.E.3), Revision 6
Engine Maximum Unladen

Wheels Power Seats Maximum Mass
Category Capacity Design Speed Mass
L1 2 ≤ 50 cm³ ≤ 50 km/h
L2 3 ≤ 50 cm³ ≤ 50 km/h
L3 2 > 50 cm³ > 50 km/h
L4 31 > 50 cm³ > 50 km/h
L5 32 > 50 cm³ > 50 km/h
L6 4 ≤ 50 cm³ ≤ 45 km/h ≤ 350 kg 3 ≤ 4 kW
L7 4 ≤ 400 kg 3,4 ≤ 15 kW
M Vehicles used for the carriage of passengers
M1 ≥4 ≤9
M2 ≥4 >9 ≤5t
M3 ≥4 >9 >5t
N Vehicles used for the carriage of goods
N1 ≥4 ≤ 3.5 t
N2 ≥4 3.5 t < m ≤ 12 t
N3 ≥4 > 12 t
O Trailers (including semi-trailers)
O1 ≤ 0.75 t
O2 0.75 t < m ≤ 3.5 t
O3 3.5 t < m ≤ 10 t
O4 > 10 t
T Agricultural or forestry vehicles
G Off-road vehicles
1
asymmetrically arranged in relation to the longitudinal median plane
2
symmetrically arranged in relation to the longitudinal median plane
3
not including the mass of the batteries in case of electric vehicles
4
≤ 550 kg for vehicles intended for carrying goods
Applicabilty of selected UN Regulations to Vehicle Categories:
UN R L1 L2 L3 L4 L5 L6 L7 M1 M2 M3 N1 N2 N3 O1 O2 O3 O4
11 ● ●
12 ● ●
14 ● ● ● ● ● ●
16 ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●
17 ● ● ● ● ● ●
21 ●
25 ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●
32 ●
33 ●
42 ●
94 ●
95 ● ●
100 ● ● ● ● ● ●
127 ● ●
135 ● ●1 ● ●1
137 ●
145 ●
1
optional up to 4500 kg
113
Dummy & Crashtest
SAFETYTESTING
Crash and Safety Testing are key elements in the product
development cycle of any new vehicle development.
The partners of SafetyTesting+active are leading companies
in crash and safety testing technology serving the global
automotive markets.
You can expect a full day of expert presentations focussing on the hot topics in
crash and safety testing, presented by the technology leaders in the industry.
The SafetyTesting+active conference that has been established in 2011 is part
of the SafetyWeek in Würzburg, Germany.
Conference Topics
The SafetyTesting+active conference will feature presentations
on the following topics:
Full scale crash testing technologies
Advanced sled simulation
Measuring technologies and data acquisition
Lighting and video technology
Testing for ADAS development
AEB testing (Car-to-Car, VRU, …)
Who should attend?

The SafetyTesting+active conference is suited for engineers and decision mak-
ers from testing departments for active and passive safety. Both experts and
newcomers get an overview over the latest innovations in test equipment and
software tool and find ample opportunity to share their own experiences with
industry colleagues.
DATE 12. May 2020

Facts
HOMEPAGE www.carhs.de/safetytesting
VENUE VCC Vogel Convention Center, Würzburg
PRICE 890,- EUR till 14.04.2020, thereafter 990,- EUR
114
Mad
e by Germe In
Mad De The World of Passive Safety Testing any
Hu
Airbag
Body Pendulum EMI
Block
Seatbelt
FMH FINAL
Test
Pedestrian OOP
Bonnet Impact Tank
Test
HuDe GmbH Gewerbestrasse Sued 55 D41812 Erkelenz Germany
www.hude.com +49243196800 [email protected]
Optical High-Speed 3D Metrology

for Crash Test Analysis
[mm]
400
350
300
250
200
150
100
50
0
[mm]
80
0
-75
-150
Head-X-Displacement
-225
Head-Y-Displacement
-300 Head-Z-Displacement
-380
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 [ms]
3D film analysis Static and dynamic component testing

Simulation verification Safety testing
Try GOM Correlate Professional now – Evaluation software for 3D testing!

Free of charge, 30 days, no contractual commitment: www.gom.com/goto/tjh2
Dummy & Crashtest
Introduction to Data Acquisition in Safety Testing

Sensor technology and data acquisition are central elements Sensors
of safety testing. A 100 % reliability of the used technology Basic sensor principles
in combination with the highest accuracy of the employed Sensors in safety testing
Selection of sensor systems
sensors are the basis for the success and usefulness of the
tests in vehicle development. The course first presents a short Systems for data acquisition (DAS)
State of the art in DAS technology
overview on the historical development of data acquisition InDummy and Onboard DAS
technology in the safety field and continues by going into Filtering
details of current technologies of sensors, data acquisition as Instrumentation
well as dummy and vehicle instrumentation. Based on the pro- Overview dummy instrumentation
cedures of a safety test, the different tasks of calibration and Overview vehicle instrumentation
certification of sensors, filtering and evaluation of signals, as Overview instrumented barriers
well as the calculation and evaluation of measurement errors Evaluation & Measuring Errors
will be explained. The course provides the basic knowledge in Error calculation (set-up of sensors, sensors, DAS,
evaluation ...)
crash data acquisition and gives a comprehensive overview
Sources of errors in crash testing
on the procedures employed in data acquisition in the crash Interpretation of signals
testing environment. Calibration and Certification
Dummy certification
Course Objectives Sensor calibration
The course participants will learn about the technology and SAE J211
terminology of sensor and data acquisition technology used in Procedures
Test preparation
safety testing. They will be qualified to define tests, to super- Test execution
vise tests and to interpret and evaluate test results. Test evaluation
Who should attend?

This introductory course aims at new test engineers and
project engineers as well as engineers from simulation depart-
ments at automotive OEMs, suppliers and engineering service
providers.
Thomas Wild (Continental Safety Engineering International GmbH) studied Electrical and
Instructor
Tele-Communications Engineering at the Technical University Darmstadt. Since 1996 he has been employed
at Continental Safety Engineering International as a measurement engineer. 1998 - 2001, he assumed addi-
tional responsibilities as an application engineer in the algorithm development. Since 2003 he is team leader
measurement and video technology. Since 1997 he works in the working group Data Processing in Vehicle
Safety (MDVFS).

Date
116
Seminar by our Partner Dummy & Crashtest
crashtest-service.com GmbH
Practical Seminar on biofidelic PRIMUS-Dummy est
e Crasht
With Liv
In modern accident reconstruction dummies are used to This workshop is aimed at those who are professionally
achieve the most accurate possible reproduction of move- engaged with crash test dummies. In particular for accident
ments, damages and injuries. The dummies used to date in researchers/analysts, experts and engineers/technicians from
the scope of standardised crash tests were developed with the automotive industry, seat and belt manufacturers who
the aim of reproducibly determining measurements and thus are searching for new solution approaches in dummy technol-
enabling comparability in various tests. For all applications, ogy or are confronted with the challenges of non-standardised
which deviate from the standard, the use of such dummies is further development.
not appropriate due to their unidirectionality and high costs. Course Contents
The PRIMUS-dummy offers an alternative, especially in the Introduction in the field of crash tests (Dipl. Ing. P.
field of vibration tests, autonomous driving and in the airbag Schimmelpfennig)
industry. Performance of the PRIMUS-dummy (Dr. M. Weyde)
Live crash test - PRIMUS-dummy vs. passenger car
The new biofidelic PRIMUS-dummy from CTS is constantly Analysis of the damages to the PRIMUS-dummy after
being developed in cooperation with HTW Dresden and TU crash test (Dr. M. Dobberstein)
Berlin and is produced using state-of-the-art technology in a Application in automotive engineering (Prof. L.
specially designed dummy laboratory at CTS. Hannawald)

In this workshop the PRIMUS-dummy is presented, which due
to ist design, the materials used and the resulting human-like
behaviour outlines nothing other than a revolution in dummy-
technology.
Course Objectives
The aim is to give the participants an extensive first experience
with the revolutionary PRIMUS-dummy. This will be presented
in detail, before ist exceptional abilities are demonstrated
under the direction of test manager Dipl.-Ing. R. Bührmann in
the scope of two live crash tests to demonstrate the forces
acting upon the vehicle occupant and pedelec drivers.
Peter Schimmelpfennig Dr.-Ing. Mirko Dobberstein

Instructors
(crashtest-service.com GmbH) (crashtest-service.com GmbH)

Managing Partner Managing Director
crashtest-service.com GmbH crashtest-service.com GmbH
Dr. Michael Weyde Prof. Dr.-Ing. Lars Hannawald

(Priester & Weyde - Büro (Dresden University of Applied
für Unfallrekonstruktion) Sciences)
Expert in Road Traffic Accidents, Professor Safety of Motor Vehicles and
working as a lecturer at the HTW Dresden Accident Analytics

Date
24.09.2020 761/3612 Münster 1 Day 790,- EUR till 27.08.2020, thereafter 940,- EUR
117
Frontal Impact Side Impact Rear Impact Child
HIII HIII HIII THOR World HIII BioRID P Q
Dummies 50 % 5% 95 % 50 %
ES-2 ES-2re SID-IIs
SID 50 % II
CRABI CAMI HIII
Series Series
UN R94 ●
UN R95 ●
UN R44 ●
Europe
UN R129 ●
UN R135 ●
UN R137 ● ●
Euro NCAP ● ● (●) ● ● ● ●
FMVSS 208 ● ● ● ●
FMVSS 214 ● ● ○
FMVSS 213 ● ● ● ● ○
America
FMVSS 202a ●
FMVSS xxx (OMDB) ○
U.S. NCAP ● ● ○ ● ● ○
IIHS ● ● ●
Current Dummy Landscape
Latin NCAP ● ● ●
Japan Regulations ● ● ● ● ●
JNCAP ● ● ● ●
China Regulations ● ● ● ●
Asia
C-NCAP ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●
KNCAP ● ● ● ● ● ●
ASEAN NCAP ● ● ●
UPDATE
ADR (Frontal, Side) ● ● ●

AUS
ANCAP ● ● (●) ● ● ● ●
GTR 7 (Head Restr.) ● ●
GTR
GTR 14 (Pole Side) ●
WISSEN
SAFETY
2020 2021 2022
118
○ = planned, no date specified
See your crash in a whole
test images new light
Introducing the revolutionary Atlas Constant Light™ system

Unlock the full imaging potential of modern, high-speed cameras
with the new Atlas Constant Light modular lighting system.
The next-gen LEDs provide flicker-free light and exceptional
brightness, allowing you to discover formerly hidden details.
Get the full picture at atlas-mts.com.
©2019 Ametek Measurement, Communication & Testing

SAFETY
WISSEN
UPDATE
THOR 50 % Male: Injury Criteria, Risk Functions

and proposed Limits
Limits for U.S. Limits for Euro

NCAP1 NCAP 2020
APPENDIX G. G.
APPENDIX Full Zero Full Zero
Region Criterion Calculation1 Table 8. Summary
Table of injury
8. Summary of injury Riskand
criteria
criteriaFunction
and 1 injury
associated
associated riskrisk
injury functions
functionsscore
used
used score
to assess injury
to assess score
risk
injury using
risk score
THOR
using testtest
THOR results.
resul
Criterion
Criterion [ref]
[ref] Calculation
Calculation Vars Vars Variable
Variable Definition
Definition
𝐻𝐻𝐻𝐻𝐶𝐶𝐻𝐻𝐻𝐻𝐶𝐶
15 15
𝑡𝑡2 𝑡𝑡2 2.5 2.5 𝑡𝑡1 𝑡𝑡1 Beginning
Beginningof time window
of time windowin 𝑠𝑠in 𝑠𝑠
1 1 𝑝𝑝(𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴 ≥
𝑝𝑝(𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴
EndEnd
of time window in
HIC15 (-) 𝐻𝐻𝐻𝐻𝐶𝐶𝐻𝐻𝐻𝐻𝐶𝐶
15 = |(𝑡𝑡 − 𝑡𝑡1 ) 𝑡𝑡[1 ) [
15 = 2|(𝑡𝑡2 − (𝑡𝑡2 (𝑡𝑡
∫ 𝑎𝑎(𝑡𝑡)𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑
1 ) 𝑡𝑡1 )
−2𝑡𝑡−
] ]| |
∫ 𝑎𝑎(𝑡𝑡)𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑 𝑡𝑡2 𝑡𝑡2 of time window in 𝑠𝑠 500
𝑠𝑠
700 500 700
APPENDIX G. 𝑡𝑡1 𝑡𝑡1 𝑎𝑎(𝑡𝑡)
𝑎𝑎(𝑡𝑡) Head CGCG
Head resultant acceleration
resultant in Beginning
acceleration of time
in Beginning window
of time in 𝑔𝑔in 𝑔𝑔
window
Table 8. Summary of injury criteria and associated injury risk functions used to assess injury risk using THOR test results
𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚
𝐵𝐵𝐵𝐵𝐵𝐵𝐵𝐵
𝐵𝐵𝐵𝐵𝐵𝐵𝐵𝐵 𝐵𝐵𝐵𝐵𝐵𝐵𝐵𝐵
𝐵𝐵𝐵𝐵𝐵𝐵𝐵𝐵 𝜔𝜔[𝑥𝑥,𝑦𝑦,𝑧𝑧]
𝜔𝜔[𝑥𝑥,𝑦𝑦,𝑧𝑧] Angular
Angular velocity
velocity of the of the head head about about the the local [x, [x,
local y, ory,z] oraxis, in in
z] axis,
Criterion [ref] Calculation Vars Variable Definition 𝑝𝑝(𝐴𝐴𝑝𝑝
2 2 2 2 𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟/𝑠𝑠, filtered
𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟/𝑠𝑠, filtered at CFC60
at CFC60
𝐻𝐻𝐻𝐻𝐶𝐶15 max⁡ max⁡ |) 𝑥𝑥 |) 2 max⁡
(|𝜔𝜔(𝑥𝑥|𝜔𝜔 (|𝜔𝜔(𝑦𝑦|𝜔𝜔
max⁡ |) 𝑦𝑦𝑡𝑡|) max⁡
max⁡
2.5 |) 𝑧𝑧 |) 2
(|𝜔𝜔(𝑧𝑧|𝜔𝜔 𝑡𝑡1 Beginning of time window in 𝑠𝑠
= √=(√(
2
) + ) (+ ( 1 ) + ) (+ ( ) ) 𝜔𝜔[𝑥𝑥,𝑦𝑦,𝑧𝑧]𝐶𝐶
𝜔𝜔[𝑥𝑥,𝑦𝑦,𝑧𝑧]𝐶𝐶 Critical
Criticalangular
angular velocities
velocities in 𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟/𝑠𝑠
in 𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟/𝑠𝑠 𝑝𝑝(𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴 ≥
Head Brain Injury 𝐻𝐻𝐻𝐻𝐶𝐶15𝜔𝜔𝑥𝑥𝑥𝑥=𝜔𝜔|(𝑡𝑡 𝑥𝑥𝑥𝑥 2 − 𝑡𝑡1 ) [
𝜔𝜔𝑦𝑦𝑦𝑦𝜔𝜔𝑦𝑦𝑦𝑦 ∫ 𝑎𝑎(𝑡𝑡)𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑]𝜔𝜔𝑧𝑧𝑧𝑧|𝜔𝜔𝑧𝑧𝑧𝑧
(𝑡𝑡2 − 𝑡𝑡1 )
𝑡𝑡2
𝜔𝜔𝑥𝑥𝑥𝑥𝜔𝜔𝑥𝑥𝑥𝑥
End of time window in 𝑠𝑠
66.25 66.25𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟/𝑠𝑠
𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟/𝑠𝑠
𝑎𝑎(𝑡𝑡) Head CG resultant acceleration in Beginning of time window in 𝑔𝑔
Criterion with ω[x,y,z] = Angular 1velocity (rad/s)
𝑡𝑡
𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚 𝜔𝜔𝑦𝑦𝑦𝑦𝜔𝜔𝑦𝑦𝑦𝑦 56.45 56.45𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟/𝑠𝑠
𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟/𝑠𝑠 0.71 1.05 - -
𝐵𝐵𝐵𝐵𝐵𝐵𝐵𝐵 𝐵𝐵𝐵𝐵𝐵𝐵𝐵𝐵 ωxC = 66.25 rad/s 𝜔𝜔
𝜔𝜔 Angular
42.87 velocity of the head about the local [x, y, or z] axis, in
42.87 𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟/𝑠𝑠
BrIC𝑁𝑁 (-) 𝐹𝐹 𝑀𝑀 2
𝑧𝑧𝑧𝑧𝜔𝜔𝑧𝑧𝑧𝑧
[𝑥𝑥,𝑦𝑦,𝑧𝑧]
𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟/𝑠𝑠, filtered at CFC60 𝑝𝑝(
𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖 𝑁𝑁𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖 ( |𝜔𝜔
max⁡ 𝑥𝑥 𝑁𝑁 =yC + |)
2
ω max⁡ =𝑧𝑧 56.45
𝐹𝐹
(𝑧𝑧|𝜔𝜔𝑦𝑦 |) 𝑦𝑦 𝑀𝑀rad/s𝑦𝑦 max⁡ 𝑧𝑧 ( |𝜔𝜔 |)
2
𝐹𝐹𝑧𝑧 𝐹𝐹 𝑧𝑧
Z-axisZ-axisforce measured
force measured at upper
at upper neck neck load cell
load in
cell 𝑁𝑁
in 𝑁𝑁 𝑝𝑝(𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴
APPENDIX = √( G. ) 𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖+𝑁𝑁(𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖 𝐹𝐹= 𝐹𝐹 𝑀𝑀
ωzC 𝑧𝑧𝑧𝑧 = 𝜔𝜔 42.87
+ ) +(
rad/s ) 𝜔𝜔𝐹𝐹[𝑥𝑥,𝑦𝑦,𝑧𝑧]𝐶𝐶 Criticalforce
Critical angular (tensionvelocities or in 𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟/𝑠𝑠 in 𝑁𝑁 [2520/-3640]
compression)
𝑝𝑝(
APPENDIX 𝜔𝜔𝑥𝑥𝑥𝑥 G. 𝑧𝑧𝑧𝑧 𝑦𝑦𝑦𝑦𝑀𝑀 𝑦𝑦𝑦𝑦 𝜔𝜔 𝑧𝑧𝑧𝑧 𝐹𝐹 𝑧𝑧𝑧𝑧 Critical force (tension or compression) in 𝑁𝑁 [2520/-3640]
Table 8.𝑦𝑦𝑦𝑦Summary of injury 𝑧𝑧𝑧𝑧
criteria and𝑀𝑀associated 𝜔𝜔𝑥𝑥𝑥𝑥 injury risk
66.25 moment
Y-axis 𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟/𝑠𝑠 functions
measured
used at upper
to assess neck
injury
loadload
risk
cellinjury
using THOR test results.
Table 8. Summary of injury criteria 𝑦𝑦and𝑀𝑀𝑦𝑦 associated Y-axisinjury moment risk functions
measured atused
upper toneck assess 𝑁𝑁𝑁𝑁𝑁𝑁𝑁𝑁risk using THOR test resu
cell
Criterion [ref] Calculation Vars𝜔𝜔𝑦𝑦𝑦𝑦 Variable Definition
a3msCriterion [g] [ref] Calculation 𝑀𝑀𝑦𝑦𝑦𝑦𝑀𝑀Vars 56.45 𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟/𝑠𝑠
Critical
Criticalmomentmoment (flexion
(flexion Variable
or extension) - Definition
or extension) in 𝑁𝑁𝑁𝑁in-𝑁𝑁𝑁𝑁 [48/-72]
[48/-72] 72 80
𝐻𝐻𝐻𝐻𝐶𝐶15 𝑡𝑡2 2.5 𝑡𝑡1 𝜔𝜔𝑧𝑧𝑧𝑧𝑦𝑦𝑦𝑦 Beginning
42.87 of time window in 𝑠𝑠
Multi-point
Multi-point 𝐻𝐻𝐻𝐻𝐶𝐶15 𝑅𝑅𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚 = 𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚(𝑈𝑈𝐿𝐿
𝑅𝑅𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚 = 𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚(𝑈𝑈𝐿𝐿 1, 𝑈𝑈𝑅𝑅, 𝑈𝑈𝑅𝑅
𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚 , 𝐿𝐿𝐿𝐿,𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚
𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚
𝑡𝑡2 , 𝐿𝐿𝑅𝑅, 𝐿𝐿𝑅𝑅 )2.5 )
𝐿𝐿𝐿𝐿 𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚 𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚
𝑅𝑅𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚 𝑅𝑅𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚 𝑡𝑡1 Overall Beginning
Overall peak peak of
resultant timedeflection
resultant windowdeflection inin𝑠𝑠𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚
in 𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚 𝑝𝑝(𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴
𝑃𝑃(𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴 ≥≥ 3)
≥ 3|⁡𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎
𝑃𝑃(𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴 3|
Thoracic 𝑁𝑁Injury
𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖 Injurywhere 𝐻𝐻𝐻𝐻𝐶𝐶 15 = |(𝑡𝑡2 − 𝑡𝑡1 ) [ 𝐹𝐹𝑧𝑧 ∫1𝑀𝑀 𝑎𝑎(𝑡𝑡)𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑 ] | 𝑡𝑡2 𝐹𝐹𝑧𝑧 End of
Z-axis time window
force measured in 𝑠𝑠 at upper neck load cell in 𝑁𝑁 𝑝𝑝(𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴
Thoracic where 𝐻𝐻𝐻𝐻𝐶𝐶15 = |(𝑡𝑡2𝑁𝑁(𝑡𝑡 − =1−) 𝑡𝑡[1 )+
𝑦𝑦
[𝑈𝑈/𝐿𝐿|𝑅𝑅/𝐿𝐿] 𝑡𝑡 Peak End of
resultant time window
deflection in
of the 𝑠𝑠 [upper/lower | left/right] quadrant in in= 1 − 𝑒𝑒𝑒𝑒𝑒𝑒 𝑝𝑝(𝐴𝐴
𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖 2𝑡𝑡 ∫ 𝑎𝑎(𝑡𝑡)𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑] | [𝑈𝑈/𝐿𝐿|𝑅𝑅/𝐿𝐿] 2 Peak resultant deflection ofinthe [upper/lower | left/right] quadrant
𝐹𝐹𝑧𝑧𝑧𝑧𝑎𝑎(𝑡𝑡)𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚Head CG resultant acceleration Beginning in of time window in (−
𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚 𝑔𝑔
Criterion 𝐹𝐹𝑧𝑧𝑧𝑧(𝑡𝑡2𝑡𝑡1− 𝑀𝑀𝑡𝑡𝑦𝑦𝑦𝑦1 ) 𝑎𝑎(𝑡𝑡) Critical = 1 − 𝑒𝑒𝑒𝑒𝑒𝑒
Criterion [𝑈𝑈/𝐿𝐿|𝑅𝑅/𝐿𝐿]
[𝑈𝑈/𝐿𝐿|𝑅𝑅/𝐿𝐿]𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚 𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚 Headforce
𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚 (tension
CG resultant or compression)
acceleration in Beginning 𝑁𝑁 [2520/-3640]of time window in 𝑔𝑔
ij (-) APPENDIX
N𝐵𝐵𝐵𝐵𝐵𝐵𝐵𝐵 G.= 4200
𝑡𝑡1 𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚
2 2𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚 𝑀𝑀𝑦𝑦 2 2 Angular Y-axis
Time-history moment
velocity ofofthe measured
the head
[left/right] at0.39
about upper
chestthe neck
local
deflection
0.85
load
[x, y,cell 𝑁𝑁𝑁𝑁
or along
along z] axis,
-[X/Y/Z]
the the in[X/Y/Z]
-
=with F(√[𝐿𝐿/𝑅𝑅]𝑋𝑋 N+ / -6400 N[𝑈𝑈/𝐿𝐿]𝑆𝑆
(tension/compression)
2 2 [𝐿𝐿/𝑅𝑅]𝑌𝑌 2 2
= 𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚
𝐵𝐵𝐵𝐵𝐵𝐵𝐵𝐵 (√[𝐿𝐿/𝑅𝑅]𝑋𝑋
𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚 + [𝐿𝐿/𝑅𝑅]𝑌𝑌 + [𝐿𝐿/𝑅𝑅]𝑍𝑍[𝑈𝑈/𝐿𝐿]𝑆𝑆
[𝑈𝑈/𝐿𝐿]𝑆𝑆 + [𝐿𝐿/𝑅𝑅]𝑍𝑍
) [𝐿𝐿/𝑅𝑅][𝑋𝑋/𝑌𝑌/𝑍𝑍]
[𝑈𝑈/𝐿𝐿]𝑆𝑆 )
𝜔𝜔[𝑥𝑥,𝑦𝑦,𝑧𝑧]
[𝐿𝐿/𝑅𝑅][𝑋𝑋/𝑌𝑌/𝑍𝑍] [𝑈𝑈/𝐿𝐿]𝑆𝑆 Time-history of the [left/right] chest deflection
𝐵𝐵𝐵𝐵𝐵𝐵𝐵𝐵 𝐵𝐵𝐵𝐵𝐵𝐵𝐵𝐵 zC [𝑈𝑈/𝐿𝐿]𝑆𝑆
[𝑈𝑈/𝐿𝐿]𝑆𝑆 𝜔𝜔 [𝑈𝑈/𝐿𝐿]𝑆𝑆 axis
𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟/𝑠𝑠, Angular
filtered
relative
velocity
at
to CFC60
the
of the head about the local [x, y, or z] axis, in
[upper/lower] spine segment in 𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚 𝑝𝑝(𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴
max⁡ M(|𝜔𝜔
yC𝑥𝑥=|)88.1 2 Nm max⁡ /Table
-117 Nm
2 (|𝜔𝜔𝑦𝑦 |)
8.2 Summary(flexion/extension)
max⁡2 (|𝜔𝜔𝑧𝑧 |)
of injury2 criteria and
2
associated
𝑀𝑀𝑦𝑦𝑦𝑦[𝑥𝑥,𝑦𝑦,𝑧𝑧] injury
𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟/𝑠𝑠,risk
Critical
axis moment
relative to
filteredfunctions
(flexion
the orused
[upper/lower]
at CFC60
extension)to spine
assess insegmentinjury
𝑁𝑁𝑁𝑁 [48/-72]inrisk
𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚using THOR test results
Compression
Compression
Multi-point
Criterion [ref]= √( =𝑅𝑅𝜔𝜔 √
𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚
max⁡ (|𝜔𝜔+𝑥𝑥 |)
= )𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚(𝑈𝑈𝐿𝐿 ( Calculation max⁡ max⁡
, 𝑈𝑈𝑅𝑅 (𝛿𝛿𝛿𝛿, |𝜔𝜔
𝛿𝛿𝛿𝛿)
)(𝛿𝛿𝛿𝛿, ,+𝐿𝐿𝐿𝐿 |)
(𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚 , 𝐿𝐿𝑅𝑅max⁡
𝑦𝑦𝛿𝛿𝛿𝛿) ))(|𝜔𝜔𝑧𝑧 |) 𝜔𝜔[𝑥𝑥,𝑦𝑦,𝑧𝑧]𝐶𝐶
𝛿𝛿[𝐿𝐿, Vars
𝑅𝑅𝛿𝛿[𝐿𝐿,𝑅𝑅] 𝑅𝑅] Critical
𝜔𝜔[𝑥𝑥,𝑦𝑦,𝑧𝑧]𝐶𝐶
Peak Peak
Overall angular
X-axis
Critical
X-axis
peak velocities
deflection
deflection
resultant
angular
ofinVariable
velocities
the
of
deflection leftleft
the orin right
or
Definition
in 𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟/𝑠𝑠 𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚 rightabdomen
abdomen in 𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚
in 𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚 𝑃𝑃(𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴 ≥ 3|⁡𝑎𝑎
( 𝐴𝐴𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝐴𝐴 )=𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚 +𝜔𝜔=𝑦𝑦𝑦𝑦( 𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚 ) + ( 𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚
𝜔𝜔𝑧𝑧𝑧𝑧 ) 𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚 𝑝𝑝(𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴
𝑝𝑝(
FShear
Thoracic𝐻𝐻𝐻𝐻𝐶𝐶Injury15[kN] the𝑠𝑠-[upper/lower - | left/right] 1.9quadrant3.1
𝑥𝑥𝑥𝑥
where Undeformed depth ofwindow
the abdomen [238.4⁡𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚]
Neck 𝜔𝜔𝑥𝑥𝑥𝑥 𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚 𝑑𝑑𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝜔𝜔𝑑𝑑𝑦𝑦𝑦𝑦 2.5 𝜔𝜔𝑧𝑧𝑧𝑧
𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎 𝑡𝑡2 𝑑𝑑𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎
𝜔𝜔𝑥𝑥𝑥𝑥
[𝑈𝑈/𝐿𝐿|𝑅𝑅/𝐿𝐿] 𝑡𝑡𝑑𝑑1𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚 66.25 PeakUndeformed
Beginning resultant of depth
time
deflection of the of in abdomen [238.4⁡𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚] in = 1 − 𝑒𝑒𝑒𝑒𝑒𝑒
Criterion [𝑈𝑈/𝐿𝐿|𝑅𝑅/𝐿𝐿]𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚 1 𝜔𝜔𝑥𝑥𝑥𝑥 66.25 𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟/𝑠𝑠 𝑝𝑝(𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴(− ≥
Acetabulum
Acetabulum 𝐻𝐻𝐻𝐻𝐶𝐶15 = |(𝑡𝑡 − 𝑡𝑡 ) [ 2 2 2 2∫ 2 𝑎𝑎(𝑡𝑡)𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑 ] | 𝜔𝜔𝐹𝐹𝑦𝑦𝑦𝑦 𝐹𝐹𝑡𝑡[𝑥𝑥,𝑦𝑦,𝑧𝑧]
[𝑥𝑥,𝑦𝑦,𝑧𝑧] X-,
56.45 𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚
End Y-,
X-, and
ofY-,
𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟/𝑠𝑠time Z-window
and axis
Z- axis force force
in 𝑠𝑠measured
measured at the at theacetabulum
acetabulum loadloadcellcell
in in
Load 𝐹𝐹 =
𝑅𝑅 𝐹𝐹
2 √𝐹𝐹
2𝑅𝑅 = 𝑥𝑥√𝐹𝐹
1 +
(𝑡𝑡2𝑥𝑥 −+ 𝐹𝐹 +
𝑦𝑦𝑡𝑡 𝐹𝐹)𝑦𝑦 2 + 𝐹𝐹 𝑧𝑧 𝐹𝐹𝑧𝑧
2 2
𝜔𝜔 56.45 𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟/𝑠𝑠 𝑝𝑝(𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴 ≥
FLoad
Tension [kN]= 𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚 (√[𝐿𝐿/𝑅𝑅]𝑋𝑋[𝑈𝑈/𝐿𝐿]𝑆𝑆 + [𝐿𝐿/𝑅𝑅]𝑌𝑌 1
[𝑈𝑈/𝐿𝐿]𝑆𝑆
𝑡𝑡1
+ [𝐿𝐿/𝑅𝑅]𝑍𝑍[𝑈𝑈/𝐿𝐿]𝑆𝑆 2
) [𝐿𝐿/𝑅𝑅][𝑋𝑋/𝑌𝑌/𝑍𝑍]
𝜔𝜔𝑧𝑧𝑧𝑧𝑎𝑎(𝑡𝑡) [𝑈𝑈/𝐿𝐿]𝑆𝑆
𝜔𝜔
𝑦𝑦𝑦𝑦2 𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘
42.87 Head𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘
Time-history
CG resultant
42.87 𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟/𝑠𝑠
[left/right] -chest
of theacceleration deflection
in Beginning - time 2.7
ofalong the [X/Y/Z]
window in 𝑔𝑔3.3
Femur 𝑁𝑁𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖Axial
Femur Axial 𝐹𝐹𝑧𝑧 𝑀𝑀𝑦𝑦 𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚
𝐹𝐹𝑧𝑧 𝐹𝐹𝑧𝑧 𝐹𝐹𝑧𝑧
𝑧𝑧𝑧𝑧
Z-axisaxis
Z-axis relative
Z-axisfemur
force femur to the
load
measured in[upper/lower]
load 𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘,
at inupper filtered
𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘, neckatload
filtered spine
CFC600
at CFC600 segment
cell in 𝑁𝑁 in 𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚
+ 𝐹𝐹 𝑀𝑀𝑦𝑦 Angular velocity of theof head about the local [x,
celly,inorin 𝑁𝑁z]𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚
axis, in 𝑝𝑝(𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴
𝑝𝑝(≥
LoadLoad𝐵𝐵𝐵𝐵𝐵𝐵𝐵𝐵𝑁𝑁𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖
Compression 𝐵𝐵𝐵𝐵𝐵𝐵𝐵𝐵 𝑁𝑁𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖 = (𝑧𝑧𝛿𝛿𝛿𝛿, 𝛿𝛿𝛿𝛿) 𝜔𝜔[𝑥𝑥,𝑦𝑦,𝑧𝑧]𝐹𝐹𝑧𝑧 Peak Z-axis
X-axis force measured
deflection at upper
the left orneck load 𝑝𝑝(𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴
M inright abdomen
max⁡
Extension 𝐴𝐴𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚 𝑁𝑁
𝐹𝐹=𝑧𝑧𝑧𝑧𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖 =𝑀𝑀𝑦𝑦𝑦𝑦 + 2 𝐹𝐹𝑧𝑧𝑧𝑧𝛿𝛿[𝐿𝐿, 𝑅𝑅] Critical force
𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟/𝑠𝑠, (tension
filtered or compression)
at(tension
CFC60 𝑁𝑁 [2520/-3640] 𝑝𝑝(
𝑝𝑝(𝐴𝐴
Revised
Revised Tibia Tibia 2
max⁡(|𝜔𝜔𝑥𝑥 |) 𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅 =max⁡ 𝐹𝐹 (𝐹𝐹 𝑑𝑑𝑧𝑧𝑧𝑧𝑀𝑀|)𝑀𝑀
|𝜔𝜔
+ 𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎
𝑀𝑀𝑦𝑦𝑦𝑦 max⁡(|𝜔𝜔 |) 2 𝐹𝐹
𝑑𝑑 𝐹𝐹𝐹𝐹 𝑧𝑧𝑧𝑧 Measured
Y-axis
Critical
Measured
Undeformed
moment
force
compressive
compressive
depth
measured
of axial
the
at
or
axial force
abdomen
upper -
compression)
force
neck
in 𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘
in
[238.4⁡𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚]
load
𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘 -in 𝑁𝑁𝑁𝑁𝑁𝑁[2520/-3640]
cell 42 57𝑝𝑝(𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴
[Nm]
Index
Index
Acetabulum
= √ (
𝜔𝜔𝑥𝑥𝑥𝑥
) + 𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅
( =
𝐹𝐹𝑐𝑐 𝐹𝐹𝑐𝑐𝑀𝑀𝑐𝑐 𝑀𝑀𝑐𝑐
2 𝜔𝜔𝑦𝑦𝑦𝑦
+𝑦𝑦
2
) +
2
(
𝜔𝜔𝑧𝑧𝑧𝑧
𝑧𝑧
) 𝑀𝑀𝜔𝜔𝑦𝑦
𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎
𝑐𝑐 𝐹𝐹𝑀𝑀
𝐹𝐹𝐹𝐹[𝑥𝑥,𝑦𝑦,𝑧𝑧]𝐶𝐶
[𝑥𝑥,𝑦𝑦,𝑧𝑧] 𝑐𝑐 𝑦𝑦
Critical
Critical
X-, Y-axis
Critical
angular
and moment
Y-,compressive
velocities
Z- axis measured
compressive axial
force axial
in
force
measured
at[12
force upper𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘]
[12at the neck
𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘] load cell 𝑁𝑁𝑁𝑁
acetabulum load cell in
≥
𝑝𝑝(𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴 2)
≥ =
2)
Load 𝐹𝐹𝑅𝑅 = √𝐹𝐹𝑥𝑥 + 𝐹𝐹𝑦𝑦 + 𝐹𝐹𝑧𝑧 𝑀𝑀𝑦𝑦𝑦𝑦𝜔𝜔 Critical
66.25 moment
𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟/𝑠𝑠 (flexion or extension) in 𝑁𝑁𝑁𝑁 [48/-72] 𝑝𝑝(𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴 ≥
𝑀𝑀 𝑥𝑥𝑥𝑥 𝑀𝑀𝑀𝑀𝑦𝑦𝑦𝑦 Measured
𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘 Critical
Measured bending
moment
bending moment(flexion
moment in or 𝑁𝑁𝑁𝑁 (resultant
inextension)
𝑁𝑁𝑁𝑁 (resultant inof𝑁𝑁𝑁𝑁medial-lateral
[48/-72] andand
of medial-lateral
Multi-point 𝑅𝑅𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚 = 𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚(𝑈𝑈𝐿𝐿𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚 , 𝑈𝑈𝑅𝑅𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚 , 𝐿𝐿𝐿𝐿𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚 , 𝐿𝐿𝑅𝑅𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚 ) 𝑅𝑅𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝜔𝜔𝑦𝑦𝑦𝑦 Overall
56.45 peak
anterior-posterior resultant deflection in 𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚 𝑃𝑃(𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴 ≥ 3|⁡𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎,
Femur Axial
Multi-point 𝑅𝑅𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚 = 𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚(𝑈𝑈𝐿𝐿𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚 , 𝑈𝑈𝑅𝑅𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚 , 𝐿𝐿𝐿𝐿𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚 , 𝐿𝐿𝑅𝑅𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚 ) 𝐹𝐹𝑧𝑧𝑅𝑅𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚 Z-axis 𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟/𝑠𝑠
anterior-posterior
Overallfemur peakloaddirections)
indirections)
resultant 𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘, filtered
deflection at CFC600
in 𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚 𝑃𝑃(𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴 ≥
Multi-point
Thoracic
Load
Injury where
Thoracic Injury where with [𝑈𝑈/𝐿𝐿|𝑅𝑅/𝐿𝐿] 𝑀𝑀𝜔𝜔𝑐𝑐 𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚
𝑀𝑀𝑐𝑐 Peak resultant
Critical
42.87
Criticalbending deflection
bending
𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟/𝑠𝑠 moment moment of [240the[240 [upper/lower
𝑁𝑁𝑁𝑁] 𝑁𝑁𝑁𝑁] | left/right] quadrant in = 1 − 𝑒𝑒𝑒𝑒𝑒𝑒 𝑝𝑝(𝐴𝐴 [
Criterion [𝑈𝑈/𝐿𝐿|𝑅𝑅/𝐿𝐿]𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚 [𝑈𝑈/𝐿𝐿|𝑅𝑅/𝐿𝐿]𝑧𝑧𝑧𝑧 Peak resultant deflection of the [upper/lower | left/right] quadrant in = 1 (−
Thoracic
Criterion
Proximal
Revised
Proximal 𝑁𝑁Tibia
Tibia
𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖 Tibia
[𝑈𝑈/𝐿𝐿|𝑅𝑅/𝐿𝐿]𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚
𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅
𝑁𝑁 = =
𝐹𝐹𝑧𝑧𝐹𝐹 𝑀𝑀
+
+
𝑀𝑀𝑦𝑦 𝐹𝐹𝑧𝑧𝐹𝐹𝑧𝑧𝐹𝐹𝑧𝑧 𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚
Z-axis
Measured
Z-axis
Z-axis
𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚upper
force
uppertibia
compressive
measuredloadload
tibia inataxial upper
𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘,
in filtered
force
𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘, neck inat
filtered load
𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘CFC600
at cell
CFC600 in 𝑁𝑁 − 𝑒𝑒𝑒𝑒𝑒𝑒
𝑝𝑝(𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴 ≥𝑝𝑝(𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴
2)𝑝𝑝(𝐴𝐴
𝑒𝑒
𝑝𝑝(=
Axial
Index Force
Axial Force = 𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚=(√[𝐿𝐿/𝑅𝑅]𝑋𝑋
2
[𝑈𝑈/𝐿𝐿]𝑆𝑆 +2[𝐿𝐿/𝑅𝑅]𝑌𝑌
𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖
𝐹𝐹𝐹𝐹
2
𝑀𝑀
𝑀𝑀
2
+2[𝐿𝐿/𝑅𝑅]𝑍𝑍[𝑈𝑈/𝐿𝐿]𝑆𝑆 ) 2 [𝐿𝐿/𝑅𝑅][𝑋𝑋/𝑌𝑌/𝑍𝑍] 𝐹𝐹
𝐹𝐹
2 Time-history
Critical of the
compressive
force [left/right]
(tension axial
or chest[12
force
compression) deflection
𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘] in 𝑁𝑁 along the [X/Y/Z]
[2520/-3640]
Chest DistalInjuryTibia
Distal Tibia
𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚 (√[𝐿𝐿/𝑅𝑅]𝑋𝑋[𝑈𝑈/𝐿𝐿]𝑆𝑆 𝑧𝑧𝑧𝑧 [𝑈𝑈/𝐿𝐿]𝑆𝑆
+ [𝐿𝐿/𝑅𝑅]𝑌𝑌
𝑐𝑐 𝑐𝑐
𝑦𝑦𝑦𝑦
[𝑈𝑈/𝐿𝐿]𝑆𝑆 + [𝐿𝐿/𝑅𝑅]𝑍𝑍[𝑈𝑈/𝐿𝐿]𝑆𝑆 ) [𝐿𝐿/𝑅𝑅][𝑋𝑋/𝑌𝑌/𝑍𝑍]
𝐹𝐹𝑧𝑧𝑀𝑀
𝑐𝑐
𝑧𝑧𝑧𝑧
[𝑈𝑈/𝐿𝐿]𝑆𝑆 2
axis
[𝑈𝑈/𝐿𝐿]𝑆𝑆
Z-axis
Time-history
relative
Z-axislower to
lower
the of the [left/right]
[upper/lower]
tibiatibiaload in
load 𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘, 37.9spine
filtered
inat𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘,
chest
segment
filtered at 52.3
deflection
CFC600
at
in
CFC600
𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚 along35 the [X/Y/Z] 60
𝑀𝑀𝑦𝑦𝐹𝐹𝑧𝑧 Y-axisaxis
Measured relative
bending
moment to the
moment
measured [upper/lower]inupper
𝑁𝑁𝑁𝑁 spine
(resultant
neck loadsegment
of in 𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚
cellmedial-lateral
𝑁𝑁𝑁𝑁 and 𝑝𝑝(𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴𝑝𝑝
Criterion
Compression
Axial Force
Axial Force
Compression [L/R][X/Y/Z]
𝐴𝐴𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚 = [U/L]Smax⁡
max⁡
2 (𝛿𝛿𝛿𝛿, 𝛿𝛿𝛿𝛿)
: Time-History
(𝛿𝛿𝛿𝛿, 𝛿𝛿𝛿𝛿) of the
𝛿𝛿[𝐿𝐿, 𝑅𝑅]
𝑀𝑀𝛿𝛿[𝐿𝐿,𝑦𝑦𝑦𝑦 𝑅𝑅]
Peakanterior-posterior
X-axis deflectiondirections)
Peakmoment
Critical X-axis deflection
of the left or right abdomen in 𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚
(flexion orofextension) the left or in right
𝑁𝑁𝑁𝑁abdomen
[48/-72] in 𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚 𝑝𝑝(𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴 ≥
Dorsiflexion
Dorsiflexion [left / right] chest 𝐴𝐴𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚 𝑑𝑑=𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎
deflection 𝑚𝑚𝑎𝑎𝑚𝑚𝑎𝑎
along 𝑥𝑥 𝐷𝐷 𝑥𝑥the𝐷𝐷 [x / y / z] 𝑑𝑑𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎
𝑀𝑀𝑀𝑀 𝑌𝑌 𝑀𝑀𝑌𝑌 Undeformed
Y-axisY-axis moment depthmeasured
moment ofmoment
the abdomen
measured at[240lower
at [238.4⁡𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚]
lower tibiatibia loadload cellcell in 𝑁𝑁𝑁𝑁in 𝑁𝑁𝑁𝑁 𝑝𝑝
R
Momentmax
Multi-point
Moment
Acetabulum (mm) 𝑅𝑅 𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚
𝑀𝑀
= 𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎
= 𝑀𝑀
𝑀𝑀𝑦𝑦 𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎
𝑦𝑦𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚(𝑈𝑈𝐿𝐿 =𝑌𝑌 𝑀𝑀
−, 𝑈𝑈𝑅𝑅
𝑌𝑌
𝐹𝐹− 𝑥𝑥 𝐷𝐷
𝑑𝑑𝐷𝐷𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎
𝐹𝐹𝑥𝑥− , − 𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚 , 𝐿𝐿𝑅𝑅𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚 )
𝐿𝐿𝐿𝐿
2 2 2spine segment
𝑅𝑅
𝐹𝐹[𝑥𝑥,𝑦𝑦,𝑧𝑧] 𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚
𝐹𝐹𝑥𝑥𝐹𝐹 𝐹𝐹𝑥𝑥
𝑐𝑐𝑑𝑑𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎 Critical
Overall
X-,X-axis
Y-, and
X-axis
bending
Undeformed
force
peak
Z- axis
measured
force
depth deflection
resultant
force measured
measured
of the abdomen
atinlowerat𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘,
lower
𝑁𝑁𝑁𝑁]
in
attibia
tibia the 𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚
load
[238.4⁡𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚]
acetabulum
cellcellin 𝑁𝑁in load 𝑁𝑁 cell in 𝑃𝑃(𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴 𝑝𝑝(𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴
≥ 𝑝𝑝(
3|⁡𝑎𝑎
Proximal
Thoracic
Acetabulum Tibia where
Injury axis relative 𝐹𝐹𝑅𝑅 =to √𝐹𝐹 the 2 [upper
𝑥𝑥 + 𝐹𝐹𝑦𝑦 2+ 𝐹𝐹𝑧𝑧 2
2 / lower] 𝑧𝑧𝐹𝐹[𝑥𝑥,𝑦𝑦,𝑧𝑧] Z-axis upper
X-,resultant
Y-, and tibia
Z- load
axis force filtered
measured atload
atCFC600
the acetabulum load cell in in 𝑝𝑝(𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴 ≥ 3)
LoadAxial Force 𝐹𝐹 = √𝐹𝐹 + 𝐹𝐹 + 𝐹𝐹 2 [𝑈𝑈/𝐿𝐿|𝑅𝑅/𝐿𝐿]
𝐷𝐷 𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘 Peak
Distance between deflection
ankle joint of the
and [upper/lower
lower tibia load| left/right]
cell quadrant
[0.0907m] 𝑝𝑝(𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴
𝑝𝑝(𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴
Criterion
Load [𝑈𝑈/𝐿𝐿|𝑅𝑅/𝐿𝐿]𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚 𝑅𝑅 𝑥𝑥 𝑦𝑦 𝑧𝑧 𝐷𝐷 𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚 Distance
𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘 between ankle joint and lower tibia load cell [0.0907m] = 1 − 𝑒𝑒𝑒𝑒𝑒𝑒 (−
𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚femur
Abdo- Femur Axial
Compression
Distal
Femur Tibia Axial = 𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚 max(δL,δR):
(√[𝐿𝐿/𝑅𝑅]𝑋𝑋[𝑈𝑈/𝐿𝐿]𝑆𝑆 2Peak X-axis
+ [𝐿𝐿/𝑅𝑅]𝑌𝑌 deflection
2 of the2[left / [𝐿𝐿/𝑅𝑅][𝑋𝑋/𝑌𝑌/𝑍𝑍]
[𝑈𝑈/𝐿𝐿]𝑆𝑆 + [𝐿𝐿/𝑅𝑅]𝑍𝑍[𝑈𝑈/𝐿𝐿]𝑆𝑆 )
𝐹𝐹𝑧𝑧 𝑚𝑚𝐹𝐹𝑧𝑧𝑚𝑚
𝐹𝐹𝑧𝑧 2
Z-axis
Mass
Z-axis
Mass between
Z-axis
Time-history
lowerloadtibia
between
femur
inankle
ankle
of the
𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘,
load joint
load filtered
injoint
[left/right]
and
in𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘,
𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘,and atfiltered
lower CFC600
lower
filtered
chest at
tibia at load
tibiaCFC600
CFC600
deflection
cellcell
load [0.72kg]
[0.72kg]
along the [X/Y/Z] 𝑝𝑝(𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴 𝑝𝑝(𝐴𝐴≥
in- 𝑚𝑚/𝑠𝑠 2 88.6 - 88
LoadAxial Force 𝑝𝑝
Load 𝑎𝑎𝑥𝑥 𝑎𝑎𝑥𝑥 [𝑈𝑈/𝐿𝐿]𝑆𝑆 X-axis X-axis acceleration to theof
acceleration the
of the tibiatibia in 2
𝑚𝑚/𝑠𝑠segment
men Revised δ maxTibia(mm) right]
𝐹𝐹 abdomen 𝑀𝑀 𝑚𝑚𝑎𝑎 𝐷𝐷 𝐹𝐹 axis relative
Measured compressive [upper/lower]
axial force in spine
𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘 in 𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚
Dorsiflexion
Inversion/
Inversion/
Revised Tibia 𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅 = + 𝐹𝐹 𝑚𝑚𝑎𝑎
𝑀𝑀 𝑚𝑚𝑎𝑎𝑦𝑦 𝐷𝐷
𝑥𝑥 𝐷𝐷 𝑀𝑀𝑀𝑀 𝑥𝑥 𝑀𝑀 𝑌𝑌 𝐹𝐹 Y-axis
X-axisX-axis moment
moment
Measured moment measured
measured
measured
compressive at
atthe lower
lower
at
axial lower tibia
tibia
force tibia
in load
load load
𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘 cell
cellcell in
in 𝑁𝑁𝑁𝑁 𝑁𝑁𝑁𝑁
in 𝑁𝑁𝑁𝑁
Compression
Index 𝑀𝑀
𝑀𝑀𝑥𝑥 𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎 =
𝑦𝑦 𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎= 𝑀𝑀 𝑀𝑀 max⁡−
−𝑥𝑥𝐹𝐹 (
𝐹𝐹 𝐷𝐷
𝛿𝛿𝛿𝛿, − 𝛿𝛿𝛿𝛿) 𝑦𝑦 𝛿𝛿[𝐿𝐿, 𝑅𝑅] Peak X-axis deflection of left or right abdomen in 𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚 𝑝𝑝(𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴 ≥ 2) = 1
𝑝𝑝(𝐴𝐴
𝑝𝑝(𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴 −
𝑦𝑦 𝐷𝐷𝑥𝑥 − 𝑥𝑥
Moment
Eversion
Eversion 𝑀𝑀 𝑥𝑥𝐴𝐴 =𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅
𝐹𝐹𝑥𝑥𝑐𝑐𝑀𝑀
𝑌𝑌 = −
𝑀𝑀 𝑐𝑐𝐹𝐹𝑦𝑦+ 𝐷𝐷 − 2 𝐹𝐹𝑐𝑐 𝐹𝐹𝐹𝐹𝑥𝑥 Critical
X-axis compressive
force measured axial force at lower [12tibia 𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘] load cell in 𝑁𝑁 𝑝𝑝(𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴 ≥ 𝑝𝑝2
Index 𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚 = 2 Y-axis force measured 𝑝𝑝(𝐴𝐴
of at thelower tibiatibia load cellcellin 𝑁𝑁in 𝑁𝑁
𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎 𝑀𝑀𝑐𝑐 2
𝑑𝑑𝐹𝐹𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎 𝑦𝑦 𝐹𝐹𝑦𝑦𝐹𝐹𝑐𝑐 Y-axis
Critical force measured
compressive atabdomen
axial lower force [12load 𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘]
res.
Moment
Moment
𝑐𝑐
𝑀𝑀 𝑑𝑑𝐷𝐷 𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎 Undeformed
Measured
Distance
Distance
bending
Measured between
between
depth
momentankle
ankle
in
joint
joint
𝑁𝑁𝑁𝑁
andand
[238.4⁡𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚]
(resultant
lower
lower
of medial-lateral
tibia
tibia load
load cell
cell
and
[0.0907m]
[0.0907m]
Acetabulum 𝐷𝐷
𝐹𝐹[𝑥𝑥,𝑦𝑦,𝑧𝑧] 𝐷𝐷𝑀𝑀 X-, Distance
Y-, andbetween
anterior-posterior Z-bending
axis force
directions) ankle moment joint and
measured in 𝑁𝑁𝑁𝑁 lower
at the (resultant
tibia load
acetabulum of medial-lateral
cellload cell in and
[0.0907m]
Pelvis Load Actetabulum 𝐹𝐹𝑅𝑅 = √𝐹𝐹𝑥𝑥 2 + 𝐹𝐹𝑦𝑦 2 + 𝐹𝐹𝑧𝑧 2
𝑀𝑀𝑐𝑐 𝑚𝑚
𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚 Mass
Mass
𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘
Critical Mass between
anterior-posterior
between
bendingbetween ankle
ankle
moment ankle joint
jointdirections)
joint
[240
and 2.583
and lower
lower
and
𝑁𝑁𝑁𝑁] lower tibia
tibia 3.486load
load
tibia cell
load cell 3.28
[0.72kg]
[0.72kg]
cell [0.72kg] 4.1 𝑝𝑝(𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴 ≥
𝑎𝑎𝑥𝑥𝑎𝑎𝑀𝑀𝑐𝑐 X-axis acceleration
Critical bending of
momentthethe tibia [240 in𝑚𝑚/𝑠𝑠
𝑚𝑚/𝑠𝑠 22 2
Load
Femur
Proximal TibiaR
Inversion/
Axial F (kN) 𝑚𝑚𝑎𝑎 𝐷𝐷
𝑎𝑎
𝐹𝐹𝑧𝑧 𝑧𝑧 𝑦𝑦 𝐹𝐹 𝑦𝑦
Y-axisY-axis
Z-axis
X-axis
acceleration
acceleration
femur
moment
load of
in
measured
the
of
𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘,
Z-axis upper tibia load in 𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘, filtered at CFC600
tibia
at
in
tibia
filtered
lower
in𝑁𝑁𝑁𝑁]
at CFC600
𝑚𝑚/𝑠𝑠
tibia load cell in 𝑝𝑝(𝐴𝐴≥
Load
Axial Proximal
Force Tibia 𝑦𝑦 𝑀𝑀 𝑥𝑥 𝐹𝐹𝑧𝑧 Z-axis upper tibia load in 𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘, filtered at CFC600 𝑁𝑁𝑁𝑁 𝑝𝑝(𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴
Eversion 𝑀𝑀𝑥𝑥 𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎 = 𝑀𝑀𝑥𝑥 − 𝐹𝐹𝑦𝑦 𝐷𝐷 − 𝑝𝑝(𝐴𝐴𝑝𝑝
Axial Force 2 𝐹𝐹 Y-axis force measured at lower tibia load
𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘 cell in 𝑁𝑁
Axial
Revised
Distal Tibia Tibia
Moment Load F z 𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅 =
𝐹𝐹 𝑀𝑀
+ 𝐹𝐹𝑧𝑧 𝐹𝐹𝑦𝑦 Z-axisMeasured
lower tibia compressive
load in 𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘, axial force
filtered inCFC600
at 𝑝𝑝(𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴 𝑝𝑝(𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴=
≥ 2)
FemurAxialIndexDistal Tibia
Force 𝐹𝐹𝑐𝑐 - 𝑀𝑀𝑐𝑐 𝐹𝐹𝑐𝑐 𝐹𝐹𝑧𝑧
𝐷𝐷 Z-axis
Distance
Critical lower tibia
between
compressive ankle load
axial joint 5.331
in
force𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘,
and[12 filtered
lower 𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘] 8.588
tibia load cell3.8
at CFC600 [0.0907m]9.07
(kN)
Axial Force
Dorsiflexion 𝑚𝑚𝑎𝑎𝑥𝑥 𝐷𝐷 𝑀𝑀𝑌𝑌 𝑚𝑚 𝑀𝑀 Y-axisMass
Measured between
moment bending anklemoment
measured joint
at lower and in lower tibia cell
tibia(resultant
𝑁𝑁𝑁𝑁 load loadof incell [0.72kg] and
medial-lateral
𝑁𝑁𝑁𝑁
Dorsiflexion 𝑀𝑀𝑦𝑦 𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎 = 𝑀𝑀𝑌𝑌 − 𝐹𝐹𝑥𝑥 𝐷𝐷 − 𝑚𝑚𝑎𝑎𝑥𝑥 𝐷𝐷 𝑀𝑀𝑌𝑌 Y-axis momentdirections) measured at lower tibia load cell in 𝑁𝑁𝑁𝑁 𝑝𝑝(𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴 ≥
Moment 𝑀𝑀𝑦𝑦 𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎 = 𝑀𝑀𝑌𝑌 − 𝐹𝐹𝑥𝑥 𝐷𝐷 2− 𝐹𝐹𝑥𝑥 𝑎𝑎𝑦𝑦 X-axisanterior-posterior
Y-axis force acceleration
measured at oflowerthe tibia tibia inload
𝑚𝑚/𝑠𝑠cell 2
in 𝑁𝑁 𝑝𝑝
Moment 2 𝐹𝐹𝑥𝑥 X-axis force measured at lower tibia load cell in 𝑁𝑁 2
Fz,upper (kN) - 𝐷𝐷 𝑀𝑀 𝑐𝑐
𝐷𝐷
Critical
Distance
bending
Distance between ankle joint and
between
moment
ankle 4.235
[240
joint
𝑁𝑁𝑁𝑁]
lower tibia
and 5.577
lower
load cell [0.0907m]
tibia load - [0.0907m]
cell -2
Proximal Tibia 𝑚𝑚 𝐹𝐹𝑧𝑧 Mass Z-axis
between upper ankletibiajoint loadand in 𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘,lower filtered
tibia load at CFC600cell [0.72kg]
Axial Force 𝑚𝑚 Mass between ankle joint and lower tibia load cell [0.72kg] 𝑝𝑝(𝐴𝐴
𝑎𝑎𝑥𝑥 X-axis acceleration of the tibia in 𝑚𝑚/𝑠𝑠 2
Tibia Inversion/
Distal Tibia
F (kN) - 𝑚𝑚𝑎𝑎𝑦𝑦 𝐷𝐷 𝑀𝑀𝑥𝑥 𝑧𝑧
𝐹𝐹 𝑎𝑎𝑥𝑥 Z-axisX-axis lower acceleration
X-axis moment measured at lower
tibia load of the tibia
in 𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘,
3.573 filtered in 𝑚𝑚/𝑠𝑠
tibia load
2
at CFC600
5.861cell in 𝑁𝑁𝑁𝑁 - 2 - 2
z,lower
Axial Force
Inversion/ 𝑀𝑀𝑥𝑥 𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎 = 𝑀𝑀𝑥𝑥 − 𝐹𝐹𝑦𝑦 𝐷𝐷 − 𝑚𝑚𝑎𝑎𝑦𝑦 𝐷𝐷 𝑀𝑀𝑥𝑥 X-axis moment measured at lower tibia load cell in 𝑁𝑁𝑁𝑁
𝑝𝑝(𝐴𝐴
Eversion 𝑀𝑀𝑥𝑥 𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎 = 𝑀𝑀𝑥𝑥 − 𝐹𝐹𝑦𝑦 𝐷𝐷 2𝑚𝑚𝑎𝑎 − 𝐷𝐷 𝐹𝐹𝑦𝑦 Y-axis force measured at lower tibia load cell in 𝑁𝑁
Moment Eversion
Dorsiflexion 𝑥𝑥 2 𝑀𝑀𝑌𝑌 𝐹𝐹𝑦𝑦 Y-axisY-axis momentforce measured at lower tibia load cell in 𝑁𝑁𝑁𝑁 𝑁𝑁
𝑀𝑀 = 𝑀𝑀 − 𝐹𝐹 𝐷𝐷 − Distance between ankle joint 𝑝𝑝(𝐴𝐴
MMoment
Moment
res (Nm)
𝐷𝐷 𝐹𝐹 at and 178 lower tibia load
240 cell𝑁𝑁[0.0907m]
- 2 [0.0907m] -2
𝑦𝑦 𝑌𝑌 𝑥𝑥
𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎 2 𝑥𝑥 𝐷𝐷 X-axisDistanceforce between
measured ankle lowerjoint tibia
and load lower cell
tibia in load cell
𝑚𝑚 𝐷𝐷 Mass betweenbetween
Distance ankle joint ankle and jointlower andtibia lower load tibiacellload [0.72kg]
cell [0.72kg]
[0.0907m]
𝑚𝑚 Mass between ankle joint and lower tibia load cell
1
as proposed in NHTSA's Request for Comments published in January 2017 𝑎𝑎𝑦𝑦 𝑚𝑚
𝑎𝑎𝑦𝑦
Y-axisMass acceleration
between
Y-axis
of the
ankle joint
acceleration
tibia
of the
in
andtibia 𝑚𝑚/𝑠𝑠
lower
2
intibia
𝑚𝑚/𝑠𝑠load cell [0.72kg]
2
2
Euro NCAP uses the lower leg of the Hybrid III dummy 𝑎𝑎𝑥𝑥 X-axis acceleration of the tibia in 𝑚𝑚/𝑠𝑠 2
Inversion/ 𝑚𝑚𝑎𝑎𝑦𝑦 𝐷𝐷 𝑀𝑀𝑥𝑥 X-axis moment measured at lower tibia load cell in 𝑁𝑁𝑁𝑁
Eversion 𝑀𝑀𝑥𝑥 𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎 = 𝑀𝑀𝑥𝑥 − 𝐹𝐹𝑦𝑦 𝐷𝐷 − 𝑝𝑝(𝐴𝐴
2 𝐹𝐹𝑦𝑦 Y-axis force measured at lower tibia load cell in 𝑁𝑁
Moment
𝐷𝐷 Distance between ankle joint and lower tibia load cell [0.0907m]
120 𝑚𝑚 Mass between ankle joint and lower tibia load cell [0.72kg]
2
led high speed lighting & positioning system
flicker-free and extraordinary brightness
www.visol.co.kr www.visolts.com [email protected]
BST 15C BST 83G1C BST IMU-C Bay SensorTec GmbH

Accelerometer Gyro sensor Inertial Measurement Unit
Features Features Features Peter Bay
l Very small size l Very small size l Anodized aluminium Erfurter Straße 31
l Meets SEA J211 l High ranges up to housing D-85386 Eching
l High shock resistance 10,000°/s l DC response
l Frequency 0 Hz (DC) l Aluminium housing l Damping 0.7 Tel.: +49 (0)89 189 41 49 11
to 3.5 kHz l Very low power accelerometer Fax: +49 (0)89 189 41 49 29
l Damping 0.05 l Very low power [email protected]
Applications consumption
Applications l Crash Test l Low mass Distributed by:
l Automotive crash test l Slide Test duetto-engineering.com
l In-dummy Applications [email protected]
instrumentation l Automobil Crashtest
bay-sensors.com
SAFETY
WISSEN in Cooperation with
BGS Böhme & Gehring GmbH
Overview Dummies
Weights, Dimensions and Instructions for Calibration
Adult Dummies for Frontal / Rear Impact
Weight Seating Height
Instruction for Calibration
(kg) (cm)
THOR 50th Percentile Male (THOR-
THOR 50 % Male 76.7 90.7 50M) Qualification Procedures
Manual, August 2016 (NHTSA)
THOR 5 % Female 46.9 81.3
Hybrid II 50 % Male 74.4 90.7 CFR 49 Part 572, Subpart B
SAE J2862, J2878
Hybrid III 5 % Female 49.1 78.7
CFR 49 Part 572, Subpart O
SAE J2779, J2876
Hybrid III 50 % Male 77.7 88.4 CFR 49 Part 572, Subpart E
1999/98/EC
Hybrid III 95 % Male 101.3 91.9 SAE J2860
BioRID II 77.7 88.4 User Manual
Adult Dummies for Side Impact

(kg) (cm)
Eurosid 1 Certification Procedure
Eurosid 1 72.0 90.4
1996/27/EC, UN R95
ES-2 72.0 90.9 FTSS - User Manual / UN R95
ES-2 re 72.4 90.9 CFR 49 Part 572, Subpart U
US-SID 76.7 89.9 CFR 49 Part 572, Subpart F
US-SID/Sid-H3 77.2 89.9 CFR 49 Part 572, Subpart M
SID IIs 44.12 78.0 CFR 49 Part 572, Subpart V
WorldSID 5 % Female 48.27 User Manual
WorldSID 50 % Male 73.91 86.9 User Manual
Child Dummies
(kg) (cm)
P0. P¾. P6. P10 3.4 - 32.0 34.5 - 72.5 User Manual
P3 15.0 56.0 User Manual
P1½ 11.0 49.5 P1½ User Manual
Q1 9.6 47.9 Q1 User Manual
Q1½ 11.1 49.9 Q1.5 User Manual
Q10 35.5 73.4 Q10 User Manual (Rev. A Draft)
CRABI 12 m 10.0 46.4 CFR 49 Part 572, Subpart R
Hybrid II - 3 y/o 15.1 57.2 CFR 49 Part 572, Subpart C
Hybrid II - 6 y/o 21.5 64.5 CFR 49 Part 572, Subpart I
Hybrid III - 3 y/o 16.19 54.6 CFR 49 Part 572, Subpart P
Hybrid III - 6 y/o 23.4 63.5 CFR 49 Part 572, Subpart N
Hybrid III - 6 y/o - weighted 27.92 64.06 - 66.6 CFR 49 Part 572, Subpart S
Hybrid III - 10 y/o 35.2 71.6 CFR 49 Part 572, Subpart T
122
Seminars by our Partner Dummy & Crashtest
Dummy-Trainings
Course Description DUMMY Hybrid III 5 %, 50 %, 95 %

The seminars give you the opportunity to gain efficiency and security in the use and
DATE 10.-11.02.2020 05.-06.10.2020
handling of dummies.
COURSE ID 707/3633 707/3634
After a short theoretical introduction you are going to be trained in the handling of the
respective dummy-type in a dummy lab in practical exercises in work groups. PRICE 1.590,- EUR each
DUMMY THOR
Course Contents DATE 23.-25.03.2020 23.-25.11.2020

Introduction of the respective dummy-type COURSE ID 721/3649 721/3650
History, development, assemblies, standard instruments, optional measuring PRICE 2.450,- EUR each
points, recent modifications, regulations for application/test, calibration DUMMY BioRID II
Complete disassembly of the dummies in work groups
DATE 17.-18.02.2020 27.-28.10.2020
Explanation of the functions of the assemblies and the individual parts, special
features, deviations from other dummy-types, practical hints for the handling of COURSE ID 708/3639 708/3640
individual assemblies, sensors and cabling, special tools, other devices, cleaning PRICE 1.590,- EUR each
Complete assembly of the dummies in work groups DUMMY WorldSID 50 %
work steps, possible assembly errors, mounting of the sensors, cabling, DATE 16.-17.03.2020 16.-17.11.2020
adjustments of joints, storing / transport
COURSE ID 718/3647 718/3648
Dummy calibration
PRICE 1.750,- EUR each
Demonstration and explanation of the calibration tests
DUMMY ES-2 / ES-2re
Course Objectives DATE 04.-05.03.2020 04.-05.11.2020
Efficiency and security in use and handling of dummies COURSE ID 709/3643 709/3644
Exact knowledge about assembly, mechanics and sensor positions PRICE 1.590,- EUR each
Understanding of the measuring possibilities and limits DUMMY SID IIs
DATE 10.-11.03.2020 10.-11.11.2020
Who should attend? COURSE ID 710/3645 710/3646
Project and test engineers, technicians, mechanics
DUMMY P- / Q-Child Dummy
DATE 14.02.2020 09.10.2020
COURSE ID 711/3637 711/3638
PRICE 875,- EUR each
DUMMY Q6 / Q10
DATE 02.03.2020 02.11.2020
COURSE ID 720/3641 720/3642
DUMMY Hybrid III 3 and 6 y/o
DATE 13.02.2020 08.10.2020
COURSE ID 712/3635 712/3636
VENUE Bergisch Gladbach
LANGUAGE
Dummy Specialists, BGS Böhme & Gehring GmbH

Instructors
BGS operates the dummy calibration laboratory of the German Federal Highway Research Institute (BASt). BGS calibrates crash
test dummies for the automotive industry. The seminars are held by experienced engineers from BGS‘ team.
123
SAFETY
WISSEN in Cooperation with
UPDATE BGS Böhme & Gehring GmbH
Impactors for Pedestrian Protection
advanced Pedestrian Legform Flexible Pedestrian Legform

Impactor: aPLI Impactor: Flex PLI
Instrumentation:
Upper body mass: Instrumentation:
1 accelerometer 3-axial1
1 angular rate sensor 3-axial1 Femur:
3 strain gauges
Femur:
3 strain gauges Knee:
3 potentiometers
Knee: 1 accelerometer 1-axial (Y)1
3 potentiometers
1 angular rate sensor 1-axial (X)1
1 accelerometer 1-axial (Y)1 Tibia:
4 strain gauges
Tibia:
4 strain gauges
Injury Criteria
Length Total Mass. Upper Body Mass Criterion
1096 mm ~25 kg 11.8 kg Tibia bending Moment
MCL Elongation
ACL / PCL Elongation
not assessed
1
Length Diameter Mass
975 mm 132 - 140 mm 13.4 kg
Upper Legform Adult Headform Impactor Child Headform Impactor

50 mm
Load transducer
Weight as
required End plate End plate
Accelerometer Accelerometer
Skin Skin
Torque
50 mm
limiting joint
350 mm
Sphere Sphere
50 mm
Strain gauges
14 mm 14 mm
Rear member Sphere ø 165 mm Sphere ø 165 mm
Front member
Foam with rubber skin
Length Width Mass Diameter Mass Diameter Mass

350 mm ~ 155 mm 11 - 18 kg Adult Headform 165 mm 4.5 kg Child Headform 165 mm 3.5 kg
more on pedestrian protection  page 100

124
ATD-H305
ATD-H350
ATD-H395
ATD - Hybrid III Dummy Models and Leg Impactor Models
 Well recognized technology supplier
 Wide range of OEMs and supplier companies worldwide
 Specialized in development, distribution
and support of high quality finite element models
 Codes: LS-Dyna, PamCrash, Abaqus, Radioss
 Always developing new models - get in touch!

ATD-aPLI
ATD-HPM
ATD-M350
M350
ATD-MODELS GmbH | 0049 (0) 3573 9999 82 | [email protected] | www.atd-models.com

Dummy & Crashtest Seminars by our Partner
Pedestrian Protection - Test Procedures
A basic prerequisite for successful implementation of pedes- Basics and current status of the regulations
trian protection is a detailed knowledge of test requirements. (presentations)
This seminar provides the complete knowledge regarding the Euro NCAP - Rating (presentation)
test methods as defined by the EU regulation on pedestrian Test preparation according to Euro NCAP testing protocol
protection and Euro NCAP’s pedestrian protection assess- and EU regulation (practical exercises)
ment in theory and praxis. Test demonstrations: Head, Upper Legform and Legform
Compact presentations explain the basics and technical details impact (demonstrations and practical exercises)
of the regulation and the test protocols. Practical exercises the Discussion
BASt’s test laboratory include test preparation, vehicle mark- Who should attend?
ing, selection of test points, handling of the impactors and the Project, test and simulation engineers,
actual testing with head and legform impactors. Technicians, mechanics
DATE 27.-29.04.2020 22.-24.09.2020
COURSE ID 713/3665 713/3666
LANGUAGE
Pedestrian Protection Workshop: Flex PLI

Course Objectives Adjustments of the Compound Springs, Clamping Bolts,
Detailed Knowledge of the new Impactor Stopper Cables, etc.
Experience with Handling and Usage of the Impactor Demonstration of both Certification Procedures
Understanding of the Impactor’s Functionality Data Analysis and Interpretation of Test Results
Course Contents Who should attend?
History, Biomechanics, Evaluation, Legislation Project, test and simulation engineers,
Assembly, Transducers, Onboard Data Acquisition, Technicians, mechanics
Technical Details
Disassembly along with Comments on Function of DATE 24.04.2020 18.09.2020
Components COURSE ID 717/3671 717/3672
Assembly along with practical Tips and Pointers to
Specialities and possible Mistakes
LANGUAGE
Pedestrian Protection Workshop: Vehicle Mark-Up

Course Objectives Tolerances
Experience with the new Vehicle Markup Default Green / Default Red Definitions
Certainty in its Application Result Analysis, Point Assessment
Deep Understanding of the Procedure Adaption of the Principle to Upper- and Lowerleg Areas
Course Contents Who should attend?
Basics, Background and Development of the Procedure Project, test and simulation engineers,
Test Area Determination, Borders, Exemption Zones, Technicians, mechanics
Special Cases
DATE 21.04.2020 15.09.2020
Necessary Laboratory Equipment, Helpful Tools
Exemplification by a complete Mark-up of a Vehicle COURSE ID 716/3669 716/3670
Color Scheme, Manufacturers Predictions, allowed VENUE Bergisch Gladbach
LANGUAGE
126
Active Safety, Driver Assistance & Autonomous Driving
Introduction to Active Safety of Vehicles

Increasing demands on the protection of vehicle occupants The seminar is aimed at new and experienced engineers
have led to a continuous reduction in the number of injured working in the field of active vehicle safety in research and
and killed persons. While more than 20,000 persons have development departments of automotive OEMs or suppli-
been killed on German roads in the early 1970s, this number ers, as well as for all other interested parties, which want to
is now just over 3,000. Passive safety, i.e. measures which are receive an overview of current and future developments in
designed to minimize the consequences of an accident, has the areas of active vehicle safety, driver assistance and auto-
made a significant contribution to this achievement. While mated driving.
the potential of passive safety is considered to be largely
exhausted and huge efforts are required to achieve further Course Contents
progress in occupant protection, active safety has become Fundamentals of active safety
increasingly important in recent years. Active Safety means Basic principles of action
measures which prevent an accident or at least reduce the Legal requirements
collision speed and thus the energy input. While technologies Euro NCAP requirements
such as ABS or ESC have been established years ago and have Current active safety systems
proven their effectiveness, new techniques such as the emer- ABS
gency brake or the lane keeping assist and numerous other ESC
Brake assist
driver assistance systems are just entering the market. It can
Pre-crash systems
be assumed that these systems will be widely used in the next
Driver assistance systems
few years and will lead to a further decrease in the number of Basic requirements and design strategies
traffic victims. Automated driving can be seen as the next step Current and future driver assistance systems
of active safety. Although there is still a lot of development Automated driving
needed in this area, it can be assumed that vehicles which will State of the art
driven at least partially automatically in certain traffic scenarios Opportunities and risks
will enter the market over the next ten years. In the seminar Human machine interface
first a brief introduction to active safety, in contrast to passive Market introduction strategies
safety is given. This is followed by a presentation of current
active safety systems and an overview of the requirements
of legislation and consumer protection organizations. In addi-
tion, current and upcoming developments in the area of driver
assistance systems and automated driving are presented.
Dr. Gerd Müller (Technical University Berlin) has been working at the department automotive
Instructor
technology of the Technical University of Berlin since 2007. From 2007 to 2015 he was a research assistant.
Since 2015 he has been a senior engineer of the same department. His research focuses on vehicle safety and
friction coefficient estimation. Dr. Müller gives the lecture "Fundamentals of Automotive Engineering" and
conducts parts of the integrated course "Driver Assistance Systems and Active Safety".

Date
127
SAFETY
WISSEN
UPDATE
NCAP Tests for Active Safety and Driver Assistance

Safety Assist Assessment based on:
Occupant Status Monitoring (OSM) Total 3.00
Driver Status Monitoring (DSM) 1.00
Seat Belt Reminder (SBR) on rear seats (n = number of rear seating positions) 1.0/n per seat
SBR on rear seats with occupant detection (n = number of rear seating positions) 1.0/n per seat
Speed Assist Systems (SAS) Total 3.00

Basic SLIF 0.50
Speed Limit Informa- Advanced SLIF 0.50
1.50
tion Function (SLIF) System Accuracy 0.25
Warning Function 0.25
Speed Limitation Function (SLF)
Speed Control For cars without SLIF 1.25
1.50
Euro NCAP / ANCAP
Function For cars with SLIF 0.75

Intelligent Speed Assist (ISA) and/or intelligent ACC 1.50
Lane Support Systems (LSS) more  page 155 Total 4.00

Human Machine Lane Departure Warning (LDW) 0.25
0.50
Interface (HMI) Blind Spot Monitoring (BSM) 0.25
Lane Keep Assist Dashed Line Single lane marking 0.25
0.50
(LKA) Solid line Single lane marking 0.25
Centreline Road Edge
no line no line 0.25
Road Edge dashed no line 0.25
Emergency Lane dashed dashed line 0.25
3.00
Keeping (ELK) dashed solid line 0.25
solid line Single lane marking 0.50
Oncoming vehicle Fully marked lanes 1.00
Overtaking vehicle Fully marked lanes 0.50
AEB Car-to-Car more  page 152 Total 6.00
AEB VRU: max. 18 Points (as part of the VRU Protection assessment) more  page 143
AEB City (as part of the Adult Occupant Protection assessment): 3 Points
AEB VRU (as part of the Pedestrian Protection assessment): 12 Points
Seat Belt Reminder: 10 Points
Latin NCAP
Speed Assistance Systems: 3 Points Get familiar with all NCAP tests in just 2 days with
our Seminar:
AEB Inter-Urban: 9 Points
ESC: 15 Points
Lane Support Systems: 3 Points learn more on  page 140
Blind Spot Detection: 3 Points more  page 57
Safety Assist Technology (SAT) Assessment 2021 - 2025

(Weighting: 20 % of the overall rating)
ASEAN NCAP
Effective Braking & Avoidance (EBA): ABS / ESC: 6 Points

Seat Belt Reminder Driver / Passenger (with seat occupancy detector) / rear seats: 6 Points
AEB: 6 Points
Advanced SAT: 2 Points
more assistance systems are assessed in the Motorcyclist Safety box
more  page 61
128
Saving More Lives
We can make life safer

by making cars safer
Each year, Autoliv’s products save

over 30,000 lives
autoliv.com
SAFETY
WISSEN
UPDATE
NCAP Tests for Active Safety and Driver Assistance

planned: Crash Avoidance Rating consisting of
Forward Collision Warning: 10 Points more  page 158
Planned Crash Avoidance Rating
Crash Imminent Braking: 12 Points more  page 158
Dynamic Brake Support: 8 Points Stars required points
Low Beam Headlighting: 20 Points (out of 100)
U.S. NCAP
Semi-automatic Headlight Beam Switching: 10 Points

 80
Amber rear Turn Signal: 5 Points
Lane Departure Warning: 12 Points  60
Blind Spot Detection: 5 Points 40

Assessment of the risk for rollover (Static Stability Factor SSF): 18 Points
Additionally as part of the pedestrian safety assessment:  20
AEB Pedestrian  0
Rear Auto Braking more  page 159
AEB Car-to-Car more  page 157 (part of the Top Safety Pick rating more  page 53 )
approach to standing vehicle at 20 km/h and 40 km/h
assessment of the speed reduction
1 additional point for FCW (Forward Collision Warning) meeting the U.S. NCAP criteria
AEB Pedestrian more  page 157 (part of the Top Safety Pick rating more  page 53 )
IIHS
3 scenarios: adult nearside, child nearside obstructed, adult longitunial

assessment of the speed reduction
1 additional point for FCW (Forward Collision Warning)
Advanced Lighting (part of the Top Safety Pick rating more  page 53 )
Assessment of the illumination and glare of high and low beam headlights in various test scenarios. Additional credit is given for
systems that automatically switch between high and low beam.
more  page 66 Max. points for adv. safety systems 2020
SBR: 4 Points
AEB Inter-Urban 32
Advanced Safety Award, consisting of: (see table) AEB Pedestrian (day) 25
AEB Pedestrian (night w/ illumination) 40
JNCAP
AEB Pedestrian (night w/o illumination) 15

LSS 16
ASV+ Award for cars achieving ≥ 12 Points Rear View Monitor 6
ASV++ Award for cars achieving ≥ 46 Points Headlights 5
ASV+++ Award for cars achieving ≥ 86 Points Pedal Misapplication 2
max. total 141
Rollover assessment based on SSF like in U.S. NCAP: 5 Points
Braking Performance Tests: Measurement of the stopping distance from 100 km/h on dry and wet road. Check if
vehicle stays within the 3.5 m wide track while braking: 5 Points
Basic Active Devices:
KNCAP
FCW, LDW, SLD, SBR front, SBR rear: 0.5 Points each
AEB Inter-Urban: 1 Points
AEB City: 1.5 Points
Additional Active Devices (optional): Max. total points for Additional Active Devices = 2 Points
ASCC, BSD, RCTA, LKA, ISA: 0.5 Points each
AEB Pedestrian, Advanced Airbag: 1 Point each
Active Safety Assessment more  page 160 (Weighting: 15 % of the overall rating): more  page 64
ESC: 4 Points
C-NCAP
AEB / FCW Car to Car Rear: 7 Points

AEB Pedestrian: 3 Points
Optional Systems: Lane Departure Warning, Speed Assistance System, Blind Spot Detection (Car-to-Car): 1 Point/
System
130
DEKRA Automobil Test Center Klettwitz.
Test regulations for autonomous driving.
The DEKRA Automobil Test Center at EuroSpeedway Lausitz is developing into Europe’s largest
independent test center for automated and connected driving. We test driver assistant systems,
driving dynamics, and vehicle safety.
AEB ESP Pedestrian protection
Test types Test types Test types

> AEB city tests (stationary vehicle) > Sinus steering maneuver with stop times > Head impact tests
> AEB inter-urban tests (stationary, con- > Steering-angle jump test > Leg and hip impact
stantly moving, and braking vehicle) > Track radius reduction test > Sensor tests for actively triggering
> General ACC tests > Double lane change systems
Tasks Tasks Tasks
> Homologation > Homologation > Homologation
> CoP tests > CoP tests > CoP tests
> Support for development > Support for development > Support for development
> Inspections according to manu- > Inspections according to manu- > Manufacturer specifications
facturer’s specifications facturer’s specifications Regulations
Regulations Regulations > ECE, EG, GTR, NCAP, TRIAS
> ECE, ISO, EuroNCAP > ECE, FMVSS
Accredited as test laboratory according to ISO 17025: Germany – DAkkS. Designated technical service in Germany – KBA,
Netherlands – RDW, Japan – TRIAS. Information security management system pursuant to ISO 27001 including VDA prototype
protection. Many years of experience in the automotive sector. Universal test benches. Large number of test tracks. Preparatory
workshops with qualified personnel.
DEKRA Automobil Test Center

Senftenberger Straße 30, 01998 Klettwitz
Phone: +49.35754.7344-500, Fax: +49.35754.7345-500
www.dekratechnologycenter.com
SAFETY
WISSEN
NEW
NCAP Assistance System Rating Matrix
Euro NCAP / ANCAP
ASEAN NCAP
Latin NCAP
U.S. NCAP
C-NCAP
KNCAP
JNCAP
C-IASI
IIHS
SBR Seat Belt Reminder ● ● ● ● ● ●
OSM / DSM Occupant/Driver Status Monitoring ● ●
COPD Child Occupant Presence Detection ● ●
ABS Anti-Lock Braking System ●
ESC Electronic Stabilty Control ● ● ●
MCB Multi Collision Brake ●
SAS Speed Assistance System ● ● ● ●
LSS Lane Support Systems ● ● ● ● ● ●
BSM Blind Spot Monitoring ● ● ● ●
AEB CCR Car to Car Rear ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●
AEB Tap Turn acoss path ●
AEB Pedestrian ● ● ● ● ● ●
AEB Reverse Pedestrian ●
AEB Cyclist ● ● ● ●
AEB PTW Powered Two Wheeler ●
FCW Forward Collision Warning ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●
DBS Dynamic Brake Support ●
AES Autonomous Emergency Steering ● ●
Emergency Call ● ● ● ●
Rear View Monitor ● ●
Rear Cross Traffic Alert ●
Headlights ● ● ● ● ●
Pedal Misapplication ●
● 2020 ● 2021 ● 2022 ● 2023
132
NEW
The requirements by New Car Assessment Programs regarding

safety-supporting driver assistance systems for passenger cars
are constantly increasing: Oncoming traffic scenarios, tests in
darkness and higher expected speed reductions are some of the
prerequisites for a 5-star rating in the Euro NCAP or an IIHS Top
Safety Pick.
The introduction of emergency brake assistants for passenger cars is being

driven forward by legislation: From 2022 they will be mandatory for passenger
cars. The details for proof of cyclist recognition are still being discussed, all other
test conditions have already been decided. The lane departure warning functions
have also been incorporated into UN R 79.03.
At the Praxis Conference Safety Assist, the boundary conditions relevant for
development will be presented: Requirements, technical principles and develop-
ment and release methods on the theory day in the conference hotel, followed by
hands-on experience on the test track on the Demo Day. Various test scenarios
will be performed and examples of how the test technology can be used will be
shown live in the test setup.
This is what awaits you: Who should attend?

The presentation of current and future requirements on emergency braking, The Praxis Conference Safety Assist
evasion and highly automated driving functions, as well as development strategies addresses everyone, who works in the
that lead to a robust system. field of safety-related driver assistance
Face to face talk with the people who set the framework for the development systems. The Praxis Conference is the
of safety assist functions: Legislative representatives, consumer protection right place to broaden and deepen
organizations, OEM representatives and suppliers of simulation and testing your network: You will meet key play-
technologies. ers in development, system integration,
Practical experience with various test setups, targets, driving robots and control regulation and verification of Safety
software on the Demo Day. Assist Systems.
DATE 02.-03. September 2020

FACTS
HOMEPAGE www.carhs.de/safetyassist
VENUE to be announced, Germany
133
Briefing on the Worldwide Status

of Automated Vehicle Policies
Regardless of the hype surrounding "self-driving cars", it is The briefing is aimed at employees from the development
clear that automated driving systems (ADS) will fundamentally departments of vehicle manufacturers and suppliers working
change the automotive industry. Moreover, despite wide- in the field of automated driving and vehicles equipped with
spread expectations that ADS hold the key to achieving sub- automated driving systems. Given the risks of misuse, it is par-
stantial reductions in road crashes, injuries, and deaths, these ticularly important for all employees in product strategy and
systems also raise concerns among safety authorities. The marketing departments.
validation of ADS requires long-duration testing and develop-
ment to ensure correct behavior under massively variable Course Contents
road conditions. Conventional regulatory methods developed Safety authority expectations for automated vehicle
over the past half-century lack methods and tools to assess safety
such performance, forcing safety authorities to look for new Role and influence of manufacturers on regulatory
ways to ensure that ADS will be safe for public use. thinking
Pressures on current regulatory methods and tools
Course Objectives Pressure on type approval for near-term framework
This seminar reviews current efforts to adapt regulatory sys- Guidance versus regulation: How and when?
tems to meet this challenge, including the vigorous debates Hybridization: Merging of self-certification and type
over strategies and methods and the roles of regulators and approval
manufacturers in ensuring the safety of automated vehicles. Levels of automation from a regulatory perspective
Current efforts to establish automated vehicle regulations
Outlook: Can regulations ensure automated vehicle
safety?

Instructor
Mr. Creamer is regularly involved with meetings of the UN World Forum for the Harmonization of Vehicle Re-
gulations (WP.29). Previously, he has held positions with the US International Trade Commission and the Motor
& Equipment Manufacturers Association (representing the US automotive supplier industry), as the represen-
tative of the US auto parts industry in Japan, and with TRW Inc. (a leading global automotive safety systems
supplier).

Date
134
AVAD3
Detector for audio/visual signals from the vehicle
Optimized test execution and faster post-processing
 CAN input: High-precision measurement of the delay time

between the in-vehicle CAN signal and the actual optical
IDEAL
Euro
and/or acoustic signalling for
 Fastest sound measurement worldwide: Detection
of tone patterns, shape and colour changes, and output
as corresponding trigger signals within 2-4 ms NCAP

 High-performance camera: 
Image processing works with
a frame rate of up to 300 Hz
Example screen of a Pattern Match detection
Tel. +49 (0) 89/125 030 90

Request a FREE business trial license: E-Mail: [email protected]
DTC – Your solution partner for measurement technology used for autonomous driving and ADAS testing.
Official distribution partner of
DTC GmbH Navigation & Security Solutions

Stefanusstraße 6a | D-82166 Gräfelfing
www.dtc-solutions.de | [email protected]
NEW
Introduction to Artificial Intelligence and Machine Learning for

Advanced Driver Assistance Systems and Automated Driving Functions
The functions of automated driving - no matter what degree Introduction of data-based development versus analytical
of automation - usually require the application of modern and rule-based approaches
artificial intelligence techniques in order to be able to real- Overview of the different procedures and areas of
ize the desired functionalities at all. The aim of this seminar application
is to present the basic methods of Artificial Intelligence and Artificial Neural Networks, Deep Learning, various variants
Machine Learning. The methods should be demonstrated and architectures
with concrete examples from the fields of assisted and auto- Decision and regression trees
mated driving. Care is also taken about validation, verification Support Vector Machines
and safeguarding of the related models and AI-based software Validation and safeguarding of models, sampling
components. procedures, robustness assessment
Data preparation and problem parameterization
Meta modeling and model committees
Course Objectives
This seminar provides an overview and a brief introduction
to the relevant methods of Artificial Intelligence and Machine
Learning, so that both developers and managers can clearly
decide which methods and procedures are relevant for their
applications and which possible pitfalls they should consider
in the application.
Who should attend?

Developers and (project) managers who have not yet had
deep experience with the methodology and want to get a
quick overview and introduction to the use of artificial intel-
ligence.
Dr. Andreas Kuhn (Andata Entwicklungstechnologie GmbH) studied Technical Mathematics

Instructor
and Mechanical Engineering at the Technical University of Vienna. After his dissertation on the simulation of
special satellite formations for the European Space Agency, he began his professional career in crash simula-
tion at BMW. After further years as a consultant for stochastic simulation at EASI Engineering GmbH (today
carhs), he founded ANDATA in 2004, where he is responsible for development and research as managing part-
ner. Since 2009 he is also co-owner of Automotive Safety Technologies GmbH in Gaimersheim.
His professional interests are founded in effective and efficient development, validation and assessment me-
thods for complex, safety-critical systems. In particular, he has been working for more than 20 years on the
development and combined application of methods from the fields of artificial intelligence, machine learning,
advanced simulation methods, scenario-based approaches and according process models in the virtual deve-
lopment of vehicles and autonomous robots. His current activities are the development and implementation
of cooperative, networked, automated driving strategies for effective traffic automation.

Date
136
NEW
Scenario-, Simulation- and Data-based Development, Validation

and Safeguarding of Automated Driving Functions
The complexity of modern driver assistance systems and auto- Overview of the basic functions of automated driving
mated driving functions sometimes requires completely new Basics of Scenario and Data-based development
methods and approaches for their development, validation Basics in Machine Learning, Data Mining and Artificial
and testing. In particular, the wide coverage and analysis of Intelligence
functions with numerical simulation over the entire operating Stochastic Simulation, Monte-Carlo-Simulation, Design-
range (the so-called Operational Design Domain) is an indis- of-Experiments
pensable tool for the effective and efficient development of Optimization and automated calibration
appropriate vehicle functions. The course is about presenting Robustness and complexity management
the basics of scenario-based and data-based development Anomaly and fault detection
and putting them in a holistic context. Development processes for complex systems and
software, top-down versus bottom-up
Functional requirements management
Course Objectives
Validation and verification
The course provides an overview and a brief introduction to
Definitions Operational Design Domain
the relevant scenario management methods for simulation
Effectiveness assessment of system functions and
and data-centric development and validation of automated
driving functions. Some key basic principles in the develop- components
Quality management for simulation data
ment of complex systems are to be taught.
Who should attend?

The seminar addresses employees of automotive manufac-
turers, suppliers, engineering service providers, government
agencies and research institutions, who are engaged in the
development and validation of automated driving functions.
In particular, method and process developers, simulation
and test engineers are also addressed, who are responsible
to implement corresponding processes and methods in their
companies to ensure safe development and assessment of
automated driving functions.
Dr. Andreas Kuhn (Andata Entwicklungstechnologie GmbH) studied Technical Mathematics

Instructor
and Mechanical Engineering at the Technical University of Vienna. After his dissertation on the simulation of
special satellite formations for the European Space Agency, he began his professional career in crash simula-
tion at BMW. After further years as a consultant for stochastic simulation at EASI Engineering GmbH (today
carhs), he founded ANDATA in 2004, where he is responsible for development and research as managing part-
ner. Since 2009 he is also co-owner of Automotive Safety Technologies GmbH in Gaimersheim.
His professional interests are founded in effective and efficient development, validation and assessment me-
thods for complex, safety-critical systems. In particular, he has been working for more than 20 years on the
development and combined application of methods from the fields of artificial intelligence, machine learning,
advanced simulation methods, scenario-based approaches and according process models in the virtual deve-
lopment of vehicles and autonomous robots. His current activities are the development and implementation
of cooperative, networked, automated driving strategies for effective traffic automation.

Date
137
Execution of Monitoring of Fallback System BASt Level SAE Level NHTSA Level
Steering and Driving Performance of Capability
Acceleration/ Environment Dynamic Driving
Deceleration Task
0 0
- Driver only
No automation No automation
according to BASt, SAE and NHTSA Definitions
1 1
Some
Assisted Driver Functionspecific
driving modes
assistance automation
2
2
Some Partially Combined
Partial
driving modes automated function
automation
automation
Levels of Driving Automation
3 3
Some Highly
Conditional Limited self driving
driving modes automated
automation automation
4
Some Fully
High
driving modes automated 3/4
automation
Limited self driving
automation /
Full self driving
5 automation
All
- Full
driving modes
WISSEN
SAFETY
automation
138
VBOX 3iS
Extraordinary precision and accuracy
The VBOX 3iS is a compact

GNSS speed sensor with
integrated IMU and wheel
sensor interface.
Providing highly accurate
measurements of speed, position and
attitude, the VBOX 3iS is the ideal
companion for testing and validating
the latest vehicle safety systems,
even in areas with poor GNSS.
Available with Multi-constellation Cost-effective Utilises wheel Integrated IMU

RTK for positional GNSS receiver: solution for ADAS speed data from for highly accurate
accuracy better GPS, GLONASS and autonomous the vehicle’s pitch, roll and yaw
than 2 cm and Galileo vehicle testing CAN bus information
Also compatible with steering robots, the VBOX 3iS can be used for
performance, braking, ADAS and benchmarking tests and has a built-in OLED
display for easy configuration and diagnostics.
vboxautomotive.co.uk/vbox3is

Course Description Focus active safety: Here the focus is on active safety
In 1979 the first New Car Assessment Program (NCAP) was systems such as AEB or lane assistance. The tests and
established by NHTSA in the United States. The goal was assessments for these systems are explained in detail.
to motivate competing car manufacturers to enhance the Tests for passive safety are only mentioned in as far as
safety level of their cars beyond the minimum safety stan- they are relevant for the overall rating.
dards defined by regulations. The same approach has been
followed globally by other organizations (e.g. by Euro NCAP, In both focusses the current overall rating methods are
IIHS, ANCAP, JNCAP, KNCAP, C-NCAP, ...) Euro NCAP which described and explained. In addition to that an outlook is
has been established in 1997 has taken a leading role and given on the roadmaps and future developments of the NCAP
has significantly influenced other countries and regions. The programs.
NCAP programs in many cases are highly dynamic, especially
in comparison with rulemaking activities. In order to reach Who should attend?
the goal to continuously improve the safety level of cars, the The seminar addresses design, simulation, testing and project
requirements need to be permanently adapted to the state engineers as well as managers who want to get a current over-
of technology. Developers in the automotive industry need to view on the global range of NCAP programs with an outlook
know about upcoming changes at an early stage in order to be on upcoming topics and trends from an insider. Depending on
able to design or equip their vehicles accordingly. In this semi- the focus of their work attendees should chose the appropri-
nar attendees get an overview of the organizations in charge ate focus of the seminar.
of the NCAP programs and become familiar with the various
test and assessment methods.
Course Contents
New Car Assessment Programs - overview
NEW U.S. NCAP
The seminar is conducted several times a year with IIHS
changing focuses: Euro NCAP
ANCAP
Focus passive safety: Here the focus is on test and JNCAP
assessment methods for passive safety. Frontal and KNCAP
side impact, whiplash, child protection and pedestrian C-NCAP
protection are discussed in detail. Tests for active safety C-IASI
are only mentioned in as far as they are relevant for the Latin NCAP
overall rating. ASEAN NCAP
Bharat NCAP
Global NCAP
Direktor and Professor Andre Seeck (German Federal Highway Research Institute)
Instructor
is head of the division "Vehicle Technology" with the German Federal Highway Research Institute (BASt). In this
position he is responsible for the preparation of European Safety Regulations. Furthermore he represents the
German Federal Ministry of Transport and Digital Infrastructure in the Board of Directors of Euro NCAP and he
is the chairman of the strategy group on automated driving and of the rating system. These positions enable
him to gain deep insight into current and future developments in vehicle safety. In 2017 NHTSA awarded him
the U. S. Government Special Award of Appreciation.

Dates
140
SafetyLighting focusses on the increasing importance of headlights in automotive safety,

as new requirements for headlights were introduced recently. IIHS established a new
rating for headlights which evaluates both the illumination of the road and the glare of
oncoming traffic. To achieve the highest IIHS award in 2020, the IIHS Top SafetyPick+,
vehicles need to acquire an “Acceptable” rating for all headlight options. C-NCAP will also
include a headlight assessment in its rating in 2021.
Another new challenge is the use of light for communication between automated
vehicles and their environment. At SafetyLighting, the current and future requirements
for headlamps will be presented and possible solutions for meeting these requirements
will be demonstrated. Experts from the fields of consumer protection, legislation and
industry will report on the state of the art in headlight technology.
Conference Topics
Importance of lighting systems for accident prevention
Current headlight technologies
Legal requirements on headlights
Consumer protection ratings
Test and development methods
Solutions and technologies
Who should attend?

SafetyLighting targets automotive development engineers and technicians, who are
involved with the development and testing of headlights.
Mobility creates quality of life. It is a prerequisite for business and commerce, but also
for personal encounters. Urban mobility, however, is increasingly coming across to their
limits. There is a threat of traffic collapse. Increasing urbanization is accelerating this trend.
Individual mobility is being supplemented or even replaced by new traffic concepts based
on autonomous shuttles. Are these shuttles safe? How do they protect their passengers
and how do they protect external road users?
Auto[nom]Mobil brings the protagonists of the new mobility together with the experts
for vehicle safety and shows ways in which autonomous urban Mobility becomes safe for
all concerned.
Conference Topics
Current projects Framework conditions of the infrastructure
Legal requirements Requirements for vehicle and interior
SAFETYLIGHTING Auto[nom]Mobil
FACTS
DATE 12. May 2020 13.- 14. May 2020
HOMEPAGE www.carhs.de/safetyweek www.carhs.de/safetyweek
VENUE VCC Vogel Convention Center, Würzburg VCC Vogel Convention Center, Würzburg
LANGUAGE Englisch Englisch
PRICE 890,- EUR till 14.04.2020, thereafter 990,- EUR 1490,- EUR till 14.04.2020, thereafter 1750,- EUR
141
SAFETY
WISSEN
Test of ESC Systems in UN R140, GTR 8 and FMVSS 126

Step 1: Slowly-Increasing-Steer Manoeuvre to determine Parameter A
At a constant velocity of 80 ±2 km/h the steering angle is ramped at 13.5 deg/s until a lateral acceleration of 0.5 g is reached. Out of 2
series (1x left turn / 1x right turn) with 3 repetitions of the manoeuvre the steering angle A (in degrees) at which the lateral acceleration
is 0.3 g is determined using linear regression.
Step 2: Sine with Dwell Manoeuvre to assess Oversteer Intervention and Responsiveness
At a velocity of von 80 ±2 km/h the vehicle is subjected to two series of test runs using a steering pattern of a sine wave at 0.7 Hz
frequency with a 500 ms delay beginning at the second peak amplitude:
δ
Steer angle
-δ
One series uses counterclockwise steering for the first half cycle, and the other series uses clockwise steering for the first half
cycle. In each series of test runs, the steering amplitude is increased from run to run, by 0.5 A, starting at 1.5 A. The steering
amplitude of the final run in each series is the greater of 6.5 A or 270 degrees, provided the calculated magnitude of 6.5 A is less
than or equal to 300 degrees. If any 0.5 A increment, up to 6.5 A, is greater than 300 degrees, the steering amplitude of the final
run is 300 degrees.
Performance Requirements:
Yaw Rate
1 s after completion of the steering input (t0) < 35 % of the first peak value of yaw rate recorded after the steering wheel angle changes
sign.
1.75 s after completion of the steering input (t0) < 20 % of the first peak value of yaw rate recorded after the steering wheel angle changes
sign.
Lateral displacement of the vehicle center of gravity with respect to its initial straight path when computed 1.07 seconds
after the Beginning of Steer (BOS)
for vehicles with GVM (GVWR) ≤ 3500 kg > 1.83 m
for vehicles with GVM (GVWR) > 3500 kg > 1.52 m
Steer angle
lateral displacement
1.83 m
(1.52 m)
yaw rate ψ
t
35 % 20 %
100 %
ψPeak
142 t = 1.07 s t0 t0 + 1 s t0 + 1.75 s

SAFETY
WISSEN
UPDATE
Euro NCAP / ANCAP Test Method for Assessment Protocol 10.0.2
AEB VRU-Pedestrian Test Protocol 3.0.2
Adult, Farside, Impact at daylight testing

50 % of the Vehicle Width 50 %
(CPFA-50) nighttime
v 0 = 10 km/h ... 60 km/h v = 8 km/h testing
nighttime testing
Adult, Nearside, Impact at with streetlights
25 % / 75 %
25 & 75 % of the Vehicle
high beam
Width (CPNA-25/75)
headlights
v 0 = 10 km/h ... 60 km/h v = 5 km/h low beam
headlights
Child, Obstruction, Near- 50 %
side, Impact at 50 % of the
Vehicle Width (CPNC-50) 1m 1m 1m
v 0 = 20 km/h ... 60 km/h v = 5 km/h
Adult, Longitudinal, Impact

at 25 & 50 % of the Vehicle 25 % / 50 %
Width (CPLA-25/50)
CPLA-50: v 0 = 20 km/h ... 60 km/h v = 5 km/h
CPLA-25: v 0 = 50 km/h ... 80 km/h v = 5 km/h
Reverse Adult, Nearside,

Impact at 50 % of the 50 %
Vehicle Width
(CPRA Moving) 20
20 v = 5 km/h v 0 = -4 km/h / -8 km/h
NEW
Reverse Adult, Stationary,

Impact at 25/50/75 % of 25 % / 50 % / 75 %
the Vehicle Width
(CPRA Stationary)
2020 v = 0 km/h v 0 = -4 km/h / -8 km/h
NEW
CPTA-Farside: v = 5 km/h
v 0 = 10 ... 20 km/h
Adult, VUT Turning, Far-
side, Nearside, Impact at
50 % of the Vehicle Width 50 %
(CPTA-Farside/Nearside)
2020
NEW CPTA-Nearside: v = 5 km/h
v 0 = 10 km/h
Prerequistes for Scoring:
The AEB system must be default ON at the start of every journey.
The AEB system must operate from speeds ≥ 10 km/h in the CPNA-75 day + night, must be able to detect
pedestrians walking as slow as 3 km/h and reduce speed in the CPNA-75 scenario at 20 km/h.
The system may not automatically switch off at a speed < 80 km/h.
The score of the pedestrian impact tests (legforms & head) must be ≥ 22 points.
143
Scoring Table: 2020 points available per test speed
NEW
v0
Scenario CPFA-50 CPNA-25 CPNA-75 CPNC-50 CPLA-50 CPLA-25 CPTA CPTA CPRA CPRA
(km/h) Farside Nearside Stationary Moving
light conditions day day night day night day day & night day day day day
Assessment Protocol 10.0.2
function assessed AEB AEB AEB AEB AEB AEB AEB FCW AEB AEB AEB AEB
Test Protocol 3.0.2
4 1 1
8 1 1
10 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
15 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
20 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
25 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
30 2 2 1 2 1 2 1
35 3 3 2 3 2 3 2
40 3 3 2 3 2 3 2
Euro NCAP / ANCAP Test Method for
45 3 3 3 3 3 3 3
50 2 2 3 2 3 2 3 3
55 2 2 3 2 3 2 3 3
60 1 1 2 1 2 1 2 2
65 1
70 1
75 1
80 1
AEB VRU-Pedestrian
max. total scenario score (1) 20 20 20 20 20 20 30 day / 30 night 4 2 2

normalized scores (2) actual score / (1)
scenario points (3) 0.5 0.25 1 0.25 1 1 1 day / 1 night 1 1 1
AEB Pedestrian total points Σ(2)·(3) max. 9 points
UPDATE
Scoring method:
pass / fail: points are awarded for full avoidance
score = points x (v0 - vimpact) / v0
pass / fail: points are awarded if vimpact ≤ v0 - 20 km/h
WISSEN
SAFETY
pass / fail: points are awarded if Forward Collision Warning (FCW) is issued @ TTC ≥ 1.7 s, or if the manufacturer demonstrates that
144
their ESS (Emergency Steering Support) system provides appropriate support to avoid the collision
VEHICLE SAFETY –
SIMULATION AND TESTING
Specialists for the development of
vehicle safety – From concept to SOP
Development of active and passive vehicle safety
respecting legal, consumer rating and customer
requirements
Validation of conventional and alternative
powertrain variants (HV, H2)
Functional development and management of
safety attributes
CAE
Component development of restraint systems
Contact
Testing and coordination of component,
EDAG Engineering GmbH
system and the complete vehicle Kreuzberger Ring 40
Execution of certification testing and 65205 Wiesbaden
homologation support Germany
Our support throughout the process chain [email protected]
is reflected in EDAGs complete vehicle
development projects.
edag.com
SAFETY
WISSEN
UPDATE
AEB VRU-Cyclist Test Protocol 3.0.2
Cyclist, Unobstructed,
Farside, Impact at 50 % of 50 %
the Vehicle Width
(CBFA-50) 2020
NEW v0 = 10 km/h ... 60 km/h v = 20 km/h
Nearside, Impact at 50 % 50 %
of the Vehicle Width
(CBNA-50)
v0 = 10 km/h ... 60 km/h v = 15 km/h
Cyclist, Obstructed,
Nearside, Impact at 50 % 50 %
of the Vehicle Width
(CBNAO-50) 0
NEW 202
v0 = 10 km/h ... 60 km/h v = 10 km/h
Longitudinal, Impact at 50 %
50 % of the Vehicle Width
(CBLA-50)
v0 = 25 km/h ... 60 km/h v = 15 km/h
Longitudinal, Impact at 25 %
(CBLA-25)
v0 = 50 km/h ... 80 km/h v = 20 km/h
daylight testing
Prerequisites for Scoring:

The AEB system must be default ON at the start of every journey.
The system may not automatically switch off at a speed < 80 km/h.
The score of the pedestrian impact tests (legforms & head) must be ≥ 22 points.
146
www.4activesystems.at
DRIVING ROBOTS • TARGET CARRIER • DIL SIMULATORS • K&C RIGS
Simulation and
testing for ADAS
GST and Soft Car 360: The only vehicle
and autonomy
target tested and approved by both
Euro NCAP and NHTSA. • From virtual testing to proving ground automation
• Product synergy of lab- and track test,
validating simulation on the test track
• Experienced local service teams worldwide
Robots and target carrier from one

supplier guarantee seamless synchronisation
and integration.
PH O N E + 4 9 6 4 0 3 7 74 610 · I N FO. E U @ A B DY N A M I C S .C O M
Scoring Table: points available per test speed
v0
Assessment Protocol 10.0.2
Scenario CBFA-50 CBNA-50 CBNAO-50 CBLA-50 CBLA-25

(km/h)
Test Protocol 3.0.2
light conditions day day day day day

function assessed AEB AEB AEB AEB FCW
10 1 1 1
15 1 1 1
20 1 1 1
25 1 1 1 1
30 1 1 1 1
35 1 1 1 2
40 1 1 1 2
Euro NCAP / ANCAP Test Method for
45 1 1 1 3
50 1 1 1 3 3
55 1 1 1 3 3
60 1 1 1 1 1
65 1
70 1
75 1
80 1
max. total scenario score (1) 11 11 11 27
AEB VRU-Cyclist
scenario points (3) 3 1.5 1.5 3
AEB Cyclist total points Σ(2)·(3) max. 9 points
UPDATE
Scoring method:
score = points x (v0 - vimpact) / v0
pass / fail: points are awarded if vimpact ≤ v0 - 20 km/h
WISSEN
SAFETY
pass / fail: points are awarded if Forward Collision Warning (FCW) is issued @ TTC ≥ 1.7 s, or if the manufacturer demonstrates that
148
their ESS (Emergency Steering Support) system provides appropriate support to avoid the collision
SAFETY
WISSEN
NEW
Test Method for AEB PTW

The MUSE (Motorbike Users Safety Enhancement) project has developed test and assessment procedures for AEB PTW (Pow-
ered Two Wheelers) that are a basis for Euro NCAP’s AEB PTW assessment starting in 2022. Please note that the actual Euro
NCAP protocols are not available at this time and may differ from the information presented here.
Motorcycle, stationary,
Unobstructed, Longitudinal, 50 %
Impact at 50 % of the Vehicle
Width (CMRs)
v0 = 10 km/h ... 60 km/h in 10 km/h steps v = 0 km/h
Motorcycle, braking, d0
Unobstructed, Longitudinal, 34.2 %
Impact at 34.2 % of the Vehicle
Width (CMRb)
v0 = 50 km/h d0 = 12m v 0 = 50 km/h, a= - 4 m/s²
v0 = 50 km/h d0 = 40m v0 = 50 km/h, a= - 4 m/s²
CMFtap: Motorcycle, Front turn

across path, Impact at 50 %
Overlap
v0 = 10 km/h ... 20 km/h v = 30 / 40 / 50 km/h

in 5 km/h steps
v = 30 / 40 / 50 km/h
CMFscp-L: Motorcycle, Front

straight cross path Left, Impact at
81.6 % Overlap
v0 = 10 km/h ... 20 km/h

in 5 km/h steps
daylight testing
Scoring Table for CMFTap and CMFscp-L:
points available per test speed
v0 (km/h) vGMT 30 km/h 40 km/h 50 km/h
10 1 1 1
15 1 1 1
20 1 1 1
max. total score (1) ∑=9
scenario points (3) 3
AEB CMFtap/ CMFscp-L total points Σ(2)·(3)
Scoring method:
pass / fail: points are awarded for full avoidance Source: MUSE – UTAC CERAM
149
SAFETY
WISSEN
NEW
Scoring Table for CMR:
points available
remaining impact speed
v0 (km/h) CMRs CMRb
vimpact (km/h)
AEB AEB FCW
10 0 >0 1
20 0 >0 1
30 <5 < 15 < 20 ≥ 20 1
40 <5 < 15 < 20 ≥ 20 1
50 <5 < 15 < 20 ≥ 20 1 1x2 1x2
60 <5 < 20 < 20 ≥ 20 1
max. total score (1) ∑=6 ∑=2 ∑=2
scenario points (3) 0.5 0.3 0.2
AEB CMR total points Σ(2)·(3)
Scoring method:
1.0 0.75 0.5 0 points are awarded depending on vimpact levels
Total AEB Car-to-PTW Score:
The maximum total score for AEB Car-to-PTW is 7.0 points (1.0 pt. CMR + 3.0 pt. CMFTap + 3.0 pt. CMFscp-L).
Test Method for Lane Support Systems PTW

The MUSE (Motorbike Users Safety Enhancement) project has developed test and assessment procedures for LSS PTW (Pow-
ered Two Wheeler) that are a basis for Euro NCAP’s LSS PTW assessment starting in 2022. Please note that the actual Euro NCAP
protocols are not available at this time and may differ from the information presented here.
Emergency Lane Keeping

Oncoming Motorcycle:
fully marked lane
v0 = 72 km/h, vlat = 0.3 - 0.6 m/s in 0.1 m/s steps, R = 1200 m v = 50 km/h
v = 50 km/h
Overtaking Motorcycle:
fully marked lane
v0 = 40 km/h, vlat = 0.6 - 0.9 m/s in 0.1 m/s steps, R = 200 m

Scoring Table for LSS PTW:
Scenario Criteria Points
Oncoming vehicle full avoidance at all vlat 1.0
Overtaking vehicle two different warnings (visual, haptic or acoustic) ≥ 1.2 s TTC or full avoidance at all vlat 1.0
max. total LSS PTW score 2.0
Note: The score distribution proposed by the MUSE project (7 points AEB PTW + 2 points LSS PTW) differs from the pro-
posal by the Euro NCAP Rating Group (6 points + 3 points) in the Euro NCAP Rating Review 2018 V1.1.
Source: MUSE – UTAC CERAM
150
SAFETY
WISSEN
UPDATE
AEB Car-to-Car Test Protocol 3.0.2
Prerequisites for Scoring in AEB Car-to-Car:

AEB system needs to be default ON at the start of every journey and de-activation should not be possible with a single push
on a button
AEB and/or FCW may not automatically switch off at speeds below 130 km/h and should have similar performance at the
same relative speeds as tested
audible component of FCW needs to be loud and clear
for CCRs only: Whiplash score for front seat must be at least “good”, full avoidance must be achieved for speeds ≤ 20 km/h in
all overlap situations
Car-to-Car Rear
CCRs*: Approach to stationary
Target with ± 50 % / ± 75 % /
100 % Overlap
AEB + FCW v0 = 10 km/h ... 80 km/h in 5 km/h steps v = 0 km/h
CCRm*: Approach to slower
Target with ± 50 % / ± 75 % /
100 % Overlap
AEB + FCW v0 = 30 km/h ... 80 km/h in 5 km/h steps v = 20 km/h
CCRb*: d0
Approach to braking Target
100 % Overlap v0 = 50 km/h d0 = 12 m v0 = 50 km/h, a = -2 m/s²
AEB + FCW v0 = 50 km/h d0 = 40 m v0 = 50 km/h, a = -2 m/s²
* CCR: Car-To-Car Rear; s: stationary; v0 = 50 km/h d0 = 12 m v0 = 50 km/h, a = -6 m/s²
m: moving; b: braking
v0 = 50 km/h d0 = 40 m v0 = 50 km/h, a = -6 m/s²
Scoring Table:
Points Points
remaining impact speed available remaining relative impact speed available
v0 (km/h)
vimpact (km/h) v relative impact (km/h)
CCRs CCRb CCRm
AEB FCW AEB FCW AEB FCW
10 0 >0 1
15 0 >0 2
20 0 >0 2
25 <5 < 15 ≥ 15 2
30 <5 < 15 < 25 ≥ 25 2 2 <5 ≥5 1
35 <5 < 15 < 25 ≥ 25 2 2 <5 ≥5 1
40 <5 < 15 < 25 < 35 ≥ 35 1 2 <5 < 15 ≥ 15 1
45 <5 < 15 < 25 < 35 ≥ 35 1 2 <5 < 15 ≥ 15 1
50 <5 < 15 < 30 < 40 ≥ 40 1 3 1x4 1x4 <5 < 15 < 25 ≥ 25 1 1
55 <5 < 15 < 30 < 45 ≥ 45 2 <5 < 15 < 25 ≥ 25 1 1
60 <5 < 20 < 35 < 50 ≥ 50 1 <5 < 15 < 25 < 35 ≥ 35 1 1
65 <5 < 20 < 40 < 55 ≥ 55 1 <5 < 15 < 25 < 35 ≥ 35 2 2
70 <5 < 20 < 40 < 60 ≥ 60 1 <5 < 15 < 30 < 40 ≥ 40 2 2
75 <5 < 25 < 45 < 65 ≥ 65 1 <5 < 15 < 30 < 45 ≥ 45 2 2
80 <5 < 25 < 50 < 70 ≥ 70 1 <5 < 20 < 35 < 50 ≥ 50 2 2
Grid point
1.0 0.75 0.5 0.25 0 ∑=14 ∑=18 ∑=4 ∑=4 1.0 0.75 0.5 0.25 0 ∑=15 ∑=11
score
152
Ready for
Euro NCAP 2020 protocol
Accredited test lab for the

development and certification of ADAS
www.tassinternational.com | [email protected] | +31 888 277 000
SAFETY
WISSEN
AEB Car-to-Car Test Protocol 3.0.2
For each test speed 5 grid points representing the 5 overlap scenarios (-75 %, -50 %, 100 %, +50 %, +75 %) are evaluated.
The score per test speed v0 for AEB and FCW is calculated as ∑ grid point scores1 x points available / 6
The score per scenario and system (AEB/FCW) is calculated as ∑ score per test speed v0 / ∑ points available
The score per system (AEB/FCW) is the average score per scenario of that system. The score per system is multiplied with
2.0 points for AEB and 1.5 points for FCW.
Where FCW does not result in full avoidance in the - 50 % overlap2 grid points, the manufacturer can alternative demonstrate
that their EES (Emergency Steering Support) system functions to avoid the collison.
Manufacturers are expected to provide a prediction of the grid point scores. This predicted score per system is multiplied with
the correction factor resulting from 10 verification tests for that system conducted by Euro NCAP3:
Correction factor = actual tested score / predicted score
Car-to-Car Front turn across path
AEB CCFtap
CCFtap: Front turn across path

Impact at 50 % Overlap GVT
AEB
v0 = 10 km/h ... 20 km/h v = 30 / 45 / 55 km/h

in 5 km/h steps
Scoring Table: points available per test speed

v0 (km/h) vGVT 30 km/h 45 km/h 55 km/h
10 1 1 1
15 1 1 1
20 1 1 1
max. total score (1) 9
scenario points (3) 2
AEB CCFtap total points Σ(2)·(3) max. 2 points
Scoring method:
pass / fail: points are awarded for full avoidance
Human Machine Interface
HMI points are added if there is a supplementary warning (other than audiovisual) for FCW (1 point) and if there is a reversible
belt pre-pretensioning in the pre-crash phase (1 point). The HMI score is scaled down to a max. of 0.5 points.
Total AEB Car-to-Car Score
The maximum total score for AEB Car-to-Car is 6 points (2 pt. CCR AEB + 1.5 pt. CCR FCW + 2.0 pt. CCFtap + 0.5 pt. HMI)
1
where the score of the 100 % overlap grid point is double counted
2
+ 50 % overlap for RHD vehicles
3
plus up to 10 additional tests sponsored by the manufacturer
154
SAFETY
WISSEN
UPDATE
Lane Support Systems Test Protocol 3.0.2
Lane Departure Warning

Dashed Line
LDW
Lane Departure Warning

Solid Line
Lane Keep Assist

Dashed Line:
Single Line

LKA
Lane Keep Assist

Solid Line:
Single Line

Road Edge: no Centerline & no
Line next to Road Edge

Road Edge: Dashed/Solid
Centerline & no Line next to
ELK
Road Edge

Centerline & Dashed Line next
to Road Edge

155
SAFETY
WISSEN
UPDATE

Centerline & Solid Line next to
Road Edge

Solid Line:
Single Line

Solid Line:
Single Line
ELK

Oncoming Vehicle: GVT
Fully Marked Lane
v0 = 72 km/h, vlat = 0.3 - 0.6 m/s in 0.1 m/s steps, R = 1200 m v = 72 km/h
Emergency Lane Keeping v = 72 km/h / 80 km/h

Overtaking Vehicle: GVT
Fully Marked Lane
v0 = 72 km/h, vlat = 0.3 - 0.6 m/s in 0.1 m/s steps, R = 1200 m (unintentional)
v0 = 72 km/h, vlat = 0.5 - 0.7 m/s in 0.1 m/s steps, R = 800 m (intentional)
Lane Support Systems (LSS) DTLE1 Points

Human Machine Lane Departure Warning (LDW) > -0.2 m 0.50
0.502
Interface (HMI) Blind Spot Monitoring (BSM) - 0.50
Lane Keep Assist Dashed Line single line > -0.3 m 0.25
0.50
(LKA) Solid Line single line > -0.3 m 0.25
Centerline Road edge
no line no line > -0.1 m 0.25
Road Edge dashed no line > -0.1 m 0.25
Emergency Lane dashed dashed line > -0.1 m 0.25
3.00
Keeping (ELK) dashed solid line > -0.1 m 0.25
Solid Line single line > -0.3 m 0.50
Oncoming Vehicle fully marked lane 1.00
Overtaking Vehicle fully marked lane 0.50
Distance To Lane Edge
1
2
max. HMI score limited to 0.50 points
156
SAFETY
WISSEN
IIHS AEB / Front Crash Prevention Test AEB Test Protocol, V. I, Oct 2013
l = 3.05 m d = 9.14 m
Approach to stationary target w = 3.66 m
v 0 = 20 km/h v = 0 km/h
v 0 = 40 km/h v = 0 km/h
Assessment:
20 km/h Test 40 km/h Test FCW
Speed reduction < 8 km/h 8 - 14 km/h ≥ 15 km/h < 8 km/h 8 - 14 km/h 15 - 34 km/h ≥ 35 km/h
Points 0 1 2 0 1 2 3 1
Rating Scheme:
Points
1 2-4 >5
Rating BASIC ADVANCED SUPERIOR
IIHS Test Scenarios for AEB Pedestrian Pedestrian AEB Test Protocol, V. II, Feb 2019
Adult, Nearside, Impact at

(CPNA-25)
day AEB
v 0 = 20 / 40 km/h v = 5 km/h
Child, Obstruction, Nearside,
Impact at 50 % of the Vehicle
Width (CPNC-50)
day AEB 1m 1m
v 0 = 20 / 40 km/h v = 5 km/h
Adult, Longitudinal, Impact
at 25 % of the Vehicle Width
(CPLA-25)
day AEB FCW(@ 60 km/h only)
v 0 = 40 / 60 km/h v = 0 km/h
Speed reduction [km/h] 0 ... 8 9 ... 18 19 ... 28 29 ... 38 39 ... 48 49 ... 58 59 ... 61
Points 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0
1.0 points are awarded if a FCW is given ≥ 2.1 s time to collision in the CPLA-2560 km/h scenario
Overall Score = 0.7 · ( CPNA-2520 + CPNA-2540 + CPNC-5020 + CPNC-5040) + 0.3 · (CPLA-2540 + CPLA-2560 + FCW60)
Overall score 0 <3 <5 ≥5
Rating
No Credit Basic Advanced Superior
157
SAFETY
WISSEN
U.S. NCAP Crash Imminent Braking

CRASH IMMINENT BRAKE SYSTEM PERFORMANCE EVALUTION, Oct 2015
LVS (Lead Vehicle Stopped)

Approach to stationary target v 0 = 25 mph (40.2 km/h) v = 0 mph
LVM (Lead Vehicle Moving)

Approach to slower target v 0 = 25 mph (40.2 km/h) v = 10 mph (16.1 km/h)
v 0 = 45 mph (72.4 km/h) v = 20 mph (32.2 km/h)
d0
LVD (Lead Vehicle Decelerating)
Approach to braking target v 0 = 35 mph (56.3 km/h) d0 = 45.3 ft (13.8 m) v 0 = 35 mph (56.3 km/h)
± 8 ft (2.4 m) a = -0.3 g
False Positive Test

Approach to steel trench plate v 0 = 25 mph (40.2 km/h) 8 ft x 12 ft x 1 in (2.4 m x 3.7 m x 25 mm)
v 0 = 45 mph (72.4 km/h)
Requirements
Scenario LVS LVM 25 mph LVM 45 mph LVD False Positive

Requirement Δv ≥ 9.8 mph no impact Δv ≥ 9.8 mph Δv ≥ 10.5 mph deceleration ≤ 0.5 g
(15.8 km/h) (15.8 km/h) (16.9 km/h)
U.S. NCAP Forward Collision Warning

FORWARD COLLISION WARNING SYSTEM CONFIRMATION TEST, Feb 2013
LVS (Lead Vehicle Stopped)

Approach to stationary target v 0 = 45 mph (72.4 km/h) v = 0 mph
LVM (Lead Vehicle Moving)

Approach to slower target v 0 = 45 mph (72.4 km/h) v = 20 mph (32.2 km/h)
d0
LVD (Lead Vehicle Decelerating)
Approach to braking target v 0 = 45 mph (72.4 km/h) d0 = 89.4 ft (30 m) v 0 = 45 mph (72.4 km/h).
± 8.2 ft (2.5 m) a = -0.3 g
Requirements
Scenario LVS LVM LVD

Requirement Alert no later than Alert no later than Alert no later than
2.1 s TTC 2.0 s TTC 2.4 s TTC
158
SAFETY
WISSEN
U.S. NCAP Rear Automatic Braking*

Rear Automatic Braking Feature Confirmation Test Procedure (Working Draft), Dec 2015
Child, 20 ft (6.096 m) -2 ft
behind rearmost point 0
of bumper @ 0/+2/-2 +2 ft
ft from centerline 20 ft
Dummy
4a Euro NCAP Pedestrian - Child Dummy static
Test Procedure
Place the direction selector in reverse while maintaining full pressure on the brake pedal.
Release the vehicle’s brake pedal and allow the vehicle to coast backward while maintaining the vehicle’s centerline within
+/- 1 inch of the longitudinal line marked on the ground.
Allow the vehicle to coast until the rear automatic braking feature intervenes by automatically engaging the service brakes
bring the vehicle to a stop or until the vehicle strikes the test object. Once either of these two outcomes occurs, the
vehicle’s brake pedal should be depressed to end the test trial. Every effort must be made to safely conduct this test. If
testing indoors, proper ventilation must be provided. No personnel shall be located to the rear of a test vehicle at any time
during the test trial.
Requirements
A positive test outcome would involve the vehicle coming to a stop before it reaches the location of the test object and with
no physical contact with the test object for each of the three test object locations assessed.
* Please note: The rear automatic brake test is part of the planned U.S. NCAP upgrade. The test procedure and requirements
are based on “Rear Automatic Braking Feature Confirmation Test Procedure (Working Draft), December 2015”. Docket NHTSA-
2015-0119.
SAFETYWISSEN.com
Know anything you need,
any�me, anywhere!
www.safetywissen.com
159
SAFETY
WISSEN
UPDATE
C-NCAP Active Safety Rating Protocol 2020
CCRs*: Approach to stationary

target
AEB + FCW
AEB v0 = 20 / 30 / 40 km/h v = 0 km/h
FCW v0 = 45 / 55 / 75 km/h
CCRm*: Approach to slower

target
AEB + FCW
AEB v0 = 30 / 45 / 65 km/h v = 20 km/h
FCW v0 = 50 / 60 / 75 km/h
CCRb*: d0
AEB CCR
Approach to braking target

v0 = 50 km/h d0 = 12 m v0 = 50 km/h, a = -4 m/s²
AEB + FCW
v0 = 50 km/h d0 = 40 m v0 = 50 km/h, a = -4 m/s²
* CCR: Car-To-Car Rear; s: stationary;
m: moving; b: braking
False Positive Test

Approach to steel trench plate v 0 = 40 / 72 km/h 2.4 m x 3.7 m x 25 mm
False Positive Test

Adjacent lane vehicle braking
d0
v0 = 40 km/h d0 = 15 m v0 = 40 km/h, a = -3 m/s²
7 Points
Adult, Farside, Impact at 25
& 50 % of the Vehicle Width
AEB VRU_Ped
(CVFA-25/50)
AEB v 0 = 20 km/h ... 60 km/h v = 6.5 km/h
Adult, Nearside, Impact at 25

& 75 % of the Vehicle Width
(CPNA-25/75)
AEB v 0 = 20 km/h ... 60 km/h v = 5 km/h
3 Points
ESC System must meet the requirements of GB/T 30677-2014. Performance test report issued by a qualified third
party institution must be submitted to C-NCAP. Alternatively the test report can be based on GTR 8, UN R13H (R140) or
ESC
FMVSS 126 but should not be in violation of GB/T 30677-2014.
4 Points
Optional Systems: Lane Departure Warning, Speed Assistance System, Blind Spot Detection (Car-to-Car)
Opt
1 Point per system / Max. 2 Points total

Max. 15 Points total
160
#MobilityLifeBalance
Time for Change.

Mobility is a central part of our every day lives. But congestion, emissions, driving bans and lack
of parking spaces are an increasing problem in today’s society. Mobility has become a burden
and at ZF, our goal is to bring people’s mobile lives back into balance. We design and produce
technologies that make mobility more affordable, comfortable, safer and cleaner – helping to
restore #MobilityLifeBalance. MobilityLifeBalance.com
Simulation & Engineering Simulation & Engineering
April 21 – 22, 2020

Congress Park Hanau
Germany
Computer simulation has become an indispensable tool in automotive

development. Tremendous progress in software and computer technology
makes it possible today to assess product and process performance before
physical prototypes have been built. Despite of significant progress in simula-
tion technology and impressive results in industrial application there remains
a number of challenges which prevent a “100 % digital prototyping”. We at
carhs.training call these Grand Challenges.
Automotive CAE Grand Challenge offers a Platform for Dialogue

The automotive CAE Grand Challenge stimulates the exchange between
users, scientists and software developers in order to solve these challenges.
Annually the current, critical challenges in automotive CAE are being identi-
fied through a survey among the simulation experts of the international auto-
motive industry. In the conference one session is dedicated to each of the
most critical challenges, the so-called Grand Challenges. In each session CAE
experts from industry, research and software development will explain the
importance of the individual Challenge for the virtual development process
and talk about their efforts to solve the challenge.
Automotive CAE Grand Challenges 2020

In September 2019 we have determined the important current challenges of
automotive CAE - the so-called “Grand Challenges” - through a survey among
the CAE experts of the international automotive industry. These "Grand Chal-
lenges" will form the topics of the sessions of our automotive CAE Grand Chal-
lenge 2020 conference:
CAE General: AI in CAE Process automation and quality assurance
Crash: Modeling of point connections for multi-materials
Durability: Influence of manufacturing processes on durability
Materials: Material and failure models for metals
NVH: Sound design electric vehicles
Multi-simulation: Simulating battery and electrical engine cooling
Special Session: Virtual testing of autonomous driving vehicles
DATE 21.-22. April 2020
Who should attend?
The conference intends bringing together industrial users, researchers and HOMEPAGE www.carhs.de/grandchallenge
software developers to discuss these current, critical challenges of automo-
tive CAE and to initiate collaboration between these groups to help overcom- Congress Park Hanau,
VENUE
ing the Grand Challenges of automotive CAE. The presentation program of Schloßplatz 1, 63450 Hanau
the conference provides both experts and beginners valuable information for
their daily work. The possibility to meet and exchange with all stakeholders of LANGUAGE Englisch
automotive CAE is a great opportunity. In the accompanying exhibition par-
ticipants can receive additional information from leading companies of CAE. 980,- EUR till 24.03.2020,
PRICE
thereafter 1.180,- EUR
162
Simulation & Engineering
The application of numerical simulation incorporating digital human models

offers exciting opportunities in automotive development. Applying human mod-
els in comfort, ergonomics and safety allows to overcome limitations imposed by
the use of real humans or their mechanical surrogates and thus enables further
optimization of automotive designs.
Autonomous vehicles will bring significant comfort benefits to passengers. How-
ever, safety cannot be compromised for alternative seating positions. Human
Modeling and Simulation is currently the only technology that will allow assess-
ment of occupant protection for new car interior architectures with flexible seat
arrangements.
In November 2020 the 8th International Symposium Human Modeling and
Simulation in Automotive Engineering will be held. The symposium intends to
continue and further advance the dialog between researchers, software devel-
opers and industrial users of human models. Presentations from renowned
researchers, software manufacturers and industrial users on biomechanical
research, digital human models and their application in automotive develop-
ment will make up a most interesting conference.
The 8th symposium is again organized in cooperation with Wayne State Univer-
sity‘s renowned Bioengineering Centre, which has been a pioneer and leading
institution in biomechanics research for automotive safety for 75 years.
Conference Topics
Image: Wiesbaden Congress & Marketing GmbH
Occupant Protection for Autonomous Vehicles
Biomechanical Research
Development of Human Models and Simulation Software
Who should attend?
Industrial Applications of Human Models
Engineers, researchers, software
Focus Theme: Occupant Protection for Autonomous Vehicles
developers and managers involved in
automotive or software development
will benefit from participating in the
symposium.
DATE 19.-20. November 2020

FACTS
HOMEPAGE www.carhs.de/humo
VENUE Hotel Oranien, Wiesbaden
LANGUAGE Englisch
164
Model Based Head Injury Criteria within Industry

To prevent injuries resulting from head impacts inside and Introduction
outside the car, the next generation of head protection design Human head surrogates and existing head injury criteria
will have to be based on improved model-based head injury Overview of head protection standards
criteria including virtual or coupled experimental and virtual The state of the art in human head FE modeling
methods. These novel approaches will consider linear and Overview of existing head models
rotational head acceleration vs time and take into account a Model validation issues
range of head injury mechanisms. By implementing recent Real world head trauma simulation
Head trauma database
research tools into new design methods, it will be possible in a
Victim kinematics and head impact conditions
near future, to propose protective structures and panels to be FE modeling of the head trauma
optimized against biomechanical injury criteria including the Model-based head injury criteria
challenging aspect of mild brain injury. An analysis of how SUF- Methodology
EHM is monitored within Euro NCAP will be exposed as well. Injury criteria for different injury mechanisms
Age dependent issues (elderly and children)
Course Objectives Application to head protection
Optimization against biomechanical injury criteria
The objective of this course is to provide an overview of head Focus on the implementation of the tool SUFEHM within an
trauma biomechanics and existing head injury criteria. Focus industrial environment (experimental and virtual testing)
will then be on the state of the art in the domain of human Conclusion and next steps
head FE modeling, both its limitations and its recent achieve-
ments. Special attention will be paid to real world head trauma
reconstruction and the derivation of model based head injury A Pre-Conference Seminar of
criteria. Finally the novel head injury prediction tool SUFEHM
(Strasbourg University Finite Element Head Model) will be
presented, with special focus to its implementation into an
industrial environment It will be shown how the assessment of
head injury risk is conducted in the context of an experimental
crash scenario and how new protection design is evaluated in
a virtual testing environment.
Who should attend?

This seminar is especially suited for engineers and technicians
who work on experimental or numerical development of
vehicle interior parts or pedestrian protection, who want to
prepare the next generation of head protection design based
on virtual methods.
Prof. Dr. Rémy Willinger (University of Strasbourg) has been leading a research group focusing
Instructor
on head & neck impact biomechanics at the University of Strasbourg since 1990. The research activity of
this lab focuses on experimental characterization of biological tissue, head and neck FE modeling and injury
mechanisms investigation via accident simulation. Development of injury criteria and protection systems mo-
deling and optimization are also part of his skills. This group contributed to ten EU projects and conducted no
less than 100 contracts with public institutions and private companies.

Date
18.11.2020 141/3592 Wiesbaden 1 Day 740,- EUR till 21.10.2020, thereafter 890,- EUR
165
Leichtbaugipfel
Lightweight Design Summit 2020:

Lightweight Design is undergoing a Renaissance
On March 24/25, 2020 specialist lectures, sessions and live

demonstrations will be used to demonstrate the key role
that is played by lightweight design. The Lightweight Design
Summit is accompanied by a large exhibition with numerous
innovations and exhibits.
The German Federal Minister of Economics Peter Altmeier

and Racing Driver and Lightweight Design Ambassador
Jeroen Bleekemolen, among others, are expected as keynote
speakers.
Who should attend?

The Automobil Industrie Light Weight Design Summit is the plat-
form for the communication between OEMs and suppliers. The
summit addresses the technical management/CEO level of OEMs
and suppliers, the purchasing management, heads of develop-
ment and design, project engineers, innovation managers and
materials specialists.
DATE 24.-25. March 2020

FACTS
HOMEPAGE www.leichtbau-gipfel.de
VENUE Vogel Convention Center, Würzburg
PRICE 980,- EUR till 31.01.2020, thereafter 1.180,- EUR
166
Run Full BEV Safety
Simulations Overnight
Altair’s industry leading solvers simulate vehicle crash events, road debris
impacts, and shocks at the speed of your vehicle program. Altair’s ongoing
investment in vehicle safety, in collaboration with leaders in vehicle battery
research, now enables the efficient and accurate analysis of the mechanical
failures that could lead to a battery fire because of a short circuit.
Learn more at altair.com/automotive

Robust Design - Vehicle Development under Uncertainty

The seminar addresses the current state of the art comple- Mathematical methods for uncertainty quantification
mented by recent achievements in research and development Linear and non-linear sensitivity analysis (global / local)
to quantify and control uncertainties (lack-of-knowledge and Design of Experiments (DoE), Response Surface Methods
variations) in vehicular development. Aspects of sensitivity (RSM)
and robustness analysis are discussed as well as topics in reli- Methods for Model Order Reduction (MOR)
ability, resilience, redundancy and model uncertainty. In addi- Robustness versus reliability
tion, numerical methods for optimization with consideration Robustness in early design stages (Set-based Design und
of uncertainties and methods for Model Order Reduction Solution Space Approach)
(MOR) to reduce computational effort are discussed. Appli- Methods for resilience, redundancy, model uncertainty
cations (e.g. NVH, crash) illustrate the usage of the methods Optimization under uncertainties
and the fact that methods should be adapted to the degree of Applications taken from acoustics and crashworthiness
maturity of the design in the development process.
Course Objectives
The seminar is focused on methods and their theoretical
background to enable the participants to realize applications
directly in the industrial context. Hence, uncertainties can
be characterized, quantified, and – together with sensitivity
analysis – concept and structural evaluations are made pos-
sible, which consider robustness, reliability, resilience, and
redundancy. Corresponding optimizations can then be real-
ized in an efficient manner.
Who should attend?

The seminar is proposed for engineers with first experiences
in numerical concept and series development of vehicles, who
are interested in including robustness, reliability and other
aspects of uncertainty management in their industrial designs.
Prof. Dr.-Ing. Fabian Duddeck (Technical University of Munich) is the head of the research
Instructor
group on optimization and robustness at the Technical University of Munich (TUM, Chair of Computational
Mechanics, www.bgu.tum.de/cm). His research is focusing on numerical methods for optimization of struc-
tures with respect of crashworthiness, NVH (noise, vibration, and harshness), durability, and other disciplines.
In this framework, new methods for stochastic modeling and robustness assessments for different types of
uncertainties (aleatoric and epistemic) are included. Besides standard approaches using probabilistic theory,
possibilistic and special methods for early phase design are developed and applied for problems in automotive,
aerospace, and civil engineering.

Date
168
Simulation and More
Finite Element Solutions
LS-DYNA Applications Service

Crash LS-DYNA support
Occupant safety Consulting
Implicit statics/dynamics Material characterization

Process simulation Pilot projects
Multiphysics Courtesy of Daimler AG Training Courtesy of Dr. Ing. h.c. F. Porsche AG
Development Optimization
Process integration Parameter identication
Material modeling Robustness investigations
Dummy models DOE/sensitivity studies
Courtesy of BMW Group Courtesy of Hyundai Motor Company
DYNAmore GmbH
Stuttgart • Dresden • Ingolstadt • Berlin • Wolfsburg • Langlingen • Zurich (CH) • Linköping (S) • Gothenborg (S) • Turin (I) • Versailles (F) • Dublin, Ohio (USA)
Tel.: +49 (0)711 - 45 96 00 - 0 • E-Mail: [email protected] • www.dynamore.de
Interior Development – Fundamentals, Materials,

Design, Manufacturing
Course Description is being done at various stages of the interior development
The seminar illustrates the subject, in many parts with work- process. Using the example of the cockpit and the cockpit
shop character: module, the materials and processes used are discussed.
Part 1: Basics of Plastics - physics, chemistry and appli- Due to the complexity of the topic a lot of real components
cation technology, in industry and in the automobile. are shown and their properties are discussed.
Processes for Rapid Prototyping and Rapid Tooling, as well Course Objectives
as the processes of mass manufacturing, such as injection The aim of the seminar is to provide the necessary skills for
molding and blow molding, are discussed. Day 1 ends with a the design of vehicle interior components and modules. This
workshop in which, based on practical examples, functional- includes in particular the choice of materials, the design and
ity and choice of materials are treated. manufacturing processes.
Part 2: Plastics in Automotive Interiors deals with the use Who should attend?
of plastics in automotive interiors and their properties. Inte- The seminar is aimed at engineers, technicians and manag-
rior components are subject to many requirements, ranging ers who are planning and controlling interior development
from the design appearance, look and touch and ergonomics projects. The focus of the seminar is on the cockpit module.
to production and assembly. The second part explains what
Instructor
Timo Baumgärtner (csi entwicklungstechnik GmbH)
SEMINAR ON DEMAND DURATION LANGUAGE

Date
You can book this seminar as an in-house seminar with a minimum of 5 participants directly at your site. 2 Days
Alternatively, if you are interested in the course, you can make a reservation. As soon as a sufficient number
of participants has been reached, we will arrange a specific course date with the interested parties.
169
Structural Optimization in Automotive Design –

Theory and Application
In recent years numerical simulation has gained importance The seminar is suited for engineers and technicians from
in all engineering disciplines. In the automotive industry the research and development departments, users that intend
development process evolved from an experiment based to a to enlarge or fresh up their background knowledge and new-
virtual development process. Through this move towards sim- comers that want to get an overview of the subject.
ulation, mathematical optimization also gained importance
and new opportunities for its application have been opened Course Contents
within the development process. Only a few years ago it Local and global optimization methods and coupled
would have been unthinkable to find the optimal cross section strategies
and the number and location of ribs for a cast part through Approximation methods
mathematical optimization, which is now common practice. Lagrange function, dual method
As there exists no single optimization method that is suited for Optimality criteria methods
all problems it is important to gain an overview over various Bionic optimization procedures (CAO, SKO, evolutionary
optimization methods and their characteristics. In the seminar algorithms, optimization with particle swarms)
the most popular and reliable optimization methods will be Coupling with FEM
presented. The focus will be on the explanation of the basic Formulation of optimization problems
concepts and ideas rather than on the detailed mathematical Sensitivity analysis
derivations and formulations. Emphasis will be on practical Determination of important variables and variable
applications. Possibilities for using optimization methods will reduction
be demonstrated through many industrial examples. The Sizing
following questions will be answered in the seminar: Which Shape optimization, use of morphing techniques,
optimization methods are suited for which problems and topology optimization
which are not? How big is the optimization effort? How can Robustness optimization
the optimization effort be minimized? Which possibilities exist Multi disciplinary and multi objective optimization
for the formulation of different optimization problems? What Numerous application examples
can lead to failure of an optimization?
Course Objectives
At the end of the seminar participants will have gained an
overview over different optimization disciplines and proce-
dures, the areas of application and their individual limitations.
Prof. Dr. Lothar Harzheim (Opel Automobile GmbH) worked in the Group of Professor Mattheck
Instructor
on the development of the optimization programs CAO and SKO, before joining the simulation department of
Opel. At Opel he is responsible for optimization, bio engineering and robustness. In this position he not only
introduced and applied optimization methods but has also developed software for topology optimization.
Prof. Dr. Harzheim regularly holds seminars for applied structural optimization and teaches at the Technical
University of Darmstadt. He is the author of the book "Strukturoptimierung: Grundlagen und Anwendungen".

Date
170
SMART VIRTUAL
PROTOTYPING
ESI software and services
enable your digital
transformation
Copyright © ESI Group 2017 - G/OM/16.103/A
www.esi-group.com/smart
Copyright © ESI Group 2017 - G/OM/16.103/A
G.OM.16.103.A_Advert_136x96mm.indd 2 23.11.2017 09:54:00

Improving Efficiency and Reducing Risk
in CAE Driven Product Development
Course Description for risk, performance and efficiency of projects supported by
To avoid mistakes and economic loss, CAE-applications numerical analyses.
require reasonable and reliable workflows. This seminar pro- Inhalte
vides background information on risks of using CAE and gives Motivation to use structured processes in CAE
recommendations of implementing best practice. Maintain- Which risks managers and analysis experts are facing?
ing high quality of CAE applications and enhancing efficiency Use of CAE to minimize risks
within the context of organizational structures and analysis Structured process management in CAE as a means to
tasks are the main focus of this seminar. Use of knowledge focus improvements
management builds a bridge between performing an analysis Duties of analysis experts and managers from liability and
project and improving efficiency. Knowledge management is warranty issues
a basis for efficiency, quality of prognosis and reliability of CAE Efficient and quality driven process management
application. A holistic view onto knowledge management and Specific procedural requirements for CAE environment
knowledge based engineering will be given. and CAE processes
Who should attend? Verification and validation
The seminar is aimed at product developers, CAE engineers Monitoring and documentation
but also managers and decision makers who are responsible Quality driven practices and collaboration with suppliers
Instructor
Prof. Dr.-Ing. Klemens Rother

(Munich University of Applied Sciences)
SEMINAR ON DEMAND DURATION LANGUAGE

Date
You can book this seminar as an in-house seminar with a minimum of 5 participants directly at your site. 1 Day
Alternatively, if you are interested in the course, you can make a reservation. As soon as a sufficient number
of participants has been reached, we will arrange a specific course date with the interested parties.
171
Design of Composite Structures

Since the mass is one of the main factors influencing the Introduction
fuel consumption of vehicles, increasing demands to reduce Elastic behavior of composite materials
energy usage and CO2 emissions, force the automotive Failure of composite materials
industry to consider the use of alternative designs and new Mechanics of composite materials and structures
materials. Composite materials have proven their potential Joining technologies for composites
to reduce the weight of structures in many applications (e.g. Design of composite structures
aerospace and motorsports). As composites have a special Fatigue and strength of composites
set-up and behave completely different than traditional mate-
rials, engineers must learn how to employ these materials to
take advantage of their special characteristics in the design
of vehicle structures. In the seminar real world examples are
used to create a basic understanding of designing composite
structures. Then the theoretical and practical foundations of
composite design are explained.
Course Objectives
After participating in the seminar participants are able to
design and develop composite structures. They understand
the specific requirements of composite structures and the
related design concepts. In the seminar special attention is
directed to the concurrent consideration of loading, design
and manufacturing related requirements. Accordingly, the dif-
ferent designs - integral, differential, fully laminated and sand-
wich - are addressed. The seminar also provides knowledge
about preliminary design and FE analysis based on classical
laminate theory.
Who should attend?

This seminar is especially designed for engineers and techni-
cians who work in the development departments of auto-
motive manufacturers, suppliers and engineering service
providers and deal with the design and development of com-
posite components.
Dr.-techn. Roland Hinterhölzl (University of Applied Sciences Upper Austria) has been
Instructor
heading the Professorship Composite Materials and the study degree program "Lightweight Design and Com-
posite Materials" at the University of Applied Sciences Upper Austria since 2016. From 2010 to 2016 he was
head of the numerical simulation department of the Institute for Carbon Composites at the Technical Univer-
sity of Munich. The focus of his work is on process simulation and structural analysis for the automotive and
aviation industries. Dr. Hinterhölzl received his doctorate in 2000 at the University of Innsbruck on the simula-
tion of the time-dependent behavior of composite materials, after he had spent several months at the Depart-
ment of Aerospace Engineering and Engineering Mechanics at the University of Texas at Austin and CRREL
(USA). Subsequently, he developed innovative composite components at the aerospace supplier FACC AG and
headed the structural analysis department.

Date
172
Material Models of Composites for Crash Simulation

Increasing demands for weight reduction paralleled by Current and upcoming areas of application of
requirements for improved crash performance and stiff- composite materials
ness of structures have strongly pushed the development of Analysis of composite materials
advanced composites. The use of composite materials today Available material models and their application
is not limited to niche applications or secondary parts; they Modelling methods for plies and laminates
are increasingly used for important load carrying structural FEM modelling of composites
components in series production. In this one day seminar Failure mechanisms and their representation
Prof. Thomas Karall presents the foundations of structural PAM-CRASH ply and delamination models
impact and crash analysis of composites with the Finite Ele- Necessary material tests
ment Method. At the beginning of the seminar an overview Examples
of current and upcoming industrial applications of composite
materials is given. Thereafter concepts for the correct physical
modeling of the complex load degradation and failure mecha-
nisms in numerical simulation are presented. The course con-
centrates on the numerical simulation of the crash behavior
of composites and is accompanied with demonstrations using
the PAM-CRASH code.
Who should attend?

The course addresses simulation and project engineers, proj-
ect managers as well as researchers involved in the analysis
and design of composite parts and structures.
Prof. Dr. Thomas Karall (Hof University of Applied Sciences) studied mechanical engineering
Instructor
at the Technical University of Vienna and received his PhD as Assistant Professor at the University of Leoben in
the field of fibre-reinforced plastics and the calculation by finite elements. From 2006 to 2010 he was head of
department at the Austrian Research Institute for Chemistry and Technology in Vienna in the field of mechani-
cal and thermal testing / fibre composites, and Secretary General of the Austrian Working Group for reinforced
plastics. From 2010 to 2015 he worked as Lead Researcher for lightweight design at Virtual Vehicle Research
Center in Graz. He was also a lecturer at the Technical University of Graz and lecturer at the FH Joanneum
Graz. Since 2015 he has been Professor at the Engineering Department of the Hof University. His areas of work
include lightweight design, fibre-reinforced composites and the finite element method.

Date
173
Material Models of Metals for Crash Simulation

Besides an appropriate spatial discretisation of the structure The course addresses engineers working in the field of crash
and a profound knowledge of the required load cases, appro- simulation and heads of simulation departments interested in
priate material modelling is a key ingredient for predictive the important topic of material modelling.
crash simulations. The load carrying structure of a car today
still mainly consists of metallic materials. The materials to be Course Contents
described are diverse. Overview of metallic materials used in cars
Influence of material structure on mechanical behavior
The seminar deals with the following materials: Phenomenological material models for metals
Mild and high strength steels, Overview of experimental methods for material
Cold formable AHSS and UHSS steels,
characterization
Hot formable and quenchable boron steels,
Identification of material parameters from experiments
Wrought Al and Mg alloys,
Discussion of the sensitivity material parameters
Cast Al and Mg alloys.
The objective of this 1 day course is to give the participants an

overview of material models of metals used in crash simula-
tion. In a first step the deformation behavior and the failure
mechanisms of each material class are explained based on
the material structure. The influence of strain rate on mate-
rial behavior is an important aspect in the context of crash
simulation and will be discussed in the seminar. In a second
step phenomenological material models for crash simulation
are introduced. In the third step the tests needed for the
characterization of materials are described and the parameter
identification for the material models is discussed. Finally and
using example simulations the sensitivity of simulation results
regarding the identified material parameters is shown.
The seminar was extremely well received in

our company! Even our colleagues, who had
already worked a lot in this area, were able
to learn many new things.“
Fabian Wolf - P+Z Engineering GmbH
Dr.-Ing. Helmut Gese (MATFEM - Partnerschaft Dr. Gese & Oberhofer)

Instructor
founded the engineering consultancy MATFEM in 1993 (from 1999 the company has been named MATFEM
partnership Dr. Gese & Oberhofer). MATFEM offers technical and scientific consultancy services at the in-
tersection of material science and finite element methods. Besides performing FEM analysis projects the area
of activity covers experimental and theoretical characterization of materials and the development of new
material models for simulation.

Date
174
Material Models of Plastics and Foams for Crash Simulation

Numerical simulation has become a fundamental element in The seminar addresses experienced CAE engineers and
the development of motor vehicles. Today, many important heads of CAE departments with an interest in plastic and
design decisions, especially in the field of crash, are based on foam materials simulation. At least 1-year of experience with
simulation results. During the last few years there has been FEM-programs such as LS-DYNA, PAM-CRASH or RADIOSS is
an increase in the use of foams in vehicles. These are, due to suggested for participating in this course.
their variety and structure, much more complicated regarding
the characteristics of the materials than "simple" materials Course Contents
such as steel or aluminum, which can be modelled rather well. Overview of polymer materials used in vehicle
Characterization of foam materials is a great challenge for the construction
simulation expert. Although by now there are different model- Verification and validation procedure for crash simulation
ling approaches available in explicit FEM-programs such as LS- Introduction to mechanics of materials
DYNA, PAM-CRASH or RADIOSS, these are, however, often not Simulation of elastic and visco-elastic rubbers and foams
satisfactory. The application of these special material models with volume elements
requires a sound knowledge and experience. Overview of available material models in explicit finite
element codes
The seminar provides an overview over plastics and foam Simulation of elastic-plastic polymers under crash loading
materials used in automotive engineering and their phe- for validation
nomenology. On the first day you obtain an introduction into Simulation of anisotropic materials with application to
the simulation of elastic and visco-elastic polymers, such as glass-fiber reinforced plastics
elastomers and elastic polymer foams with volume elements.
You are thereby coming to understand the available material
models in explicit finite element programs. On the second day
the focus is on the treatment of plastics, such as thermo- and
duroplastics through elasto-plasticity with isotropic hardening.
Non-associated deformation is going to be discussed as well.
The seminar is rounded off with the procedure for simulation
of glass-fiber reinforced plastics using both isotropic and aniso-
tropic material laws. For a demonstration you are going to see
examples created with the program LS-DYNA. References to
material models in LS-DYNA an PAM-CRASH are going to help
you in applying what you will have learnt.
Prof. Dr.-Ing. Stefan Kolling (TTH Mittelhessen University of Applied Sciences) is Professor
Instructor
for Mechanics at the TH Mittelhessen University of Applied Sciences (THM). Previously he worked as a simulation
engineer at the Mercedes Technology Center in Sindelfingen. He was responsible for methods development in crash
simulation. In particular he was involved in the modelling of non-metal materials such as glass, polymers and plastics.
Prof. Kolling graduated from the Universities of Saarbrücken and Darmstadt, from where he also received his
Ph.D. He is author of numerous publications in the field of material modeling.

Date
175
Modeling of Joints in Crash Simulation

For the efficient assembly of components and complete struc- Overview of modeling techniques for different
tures many different joining techniques are available. Joints joining techniques
have to ensure that the assembly will fulfill crashworthiness, Tests and methods for characterization of joints
durability and other requirements. Therefore the best joining Local loading conditions at joints during testing
technique has to be selected for each application. Modern under shear, tension and bending load
lightweight design often uses a material mix. Using different Characteristics of failure behavior
materials, like various steel grades, lightweight alloys, plastics Failure modelling of
or composites for applications for which the individual mate- Spot welded joints including spot welds in press
rial is best suited allows for weight savings. The efficient and hardened steels
Self-piercing riveted joints
reliable joining of different materials is even more challenging.
Laser welded joints
Failure of joints can be a reason for collapse of vehicle struc- Adhesive joints
tures during crash testing. Therefore failure of joints must be Calibration methods for determination of model
precisely predicted in numerical crash simulation applied in parameters
the virtual design process of vehicle development. Validation of calibrated models through testing
and simulation
Course Objectives
The objective of this one day course is to give the participants
an overview of failure modelling of different joints (puncti-
form, linear, planar joints) for crash simulation and also of
the characterization tests and methods that are necessary for
calibrating the model parameters. Also recommendation for
validation tests and simulations of calibrated joint models are
given. Examples of typical and used models are shown in all
common crash codes.
Who should attend?

The course addresses engineers working in the field of crash
simulation and heads of simulation departments interested
in the important topic of modelling of joints including failure.
Dr.-Ing. Silke Sommer (Fraunhofer-Institut für Werkstoffmechanik) studied Physics at the

Instructor
RWTH Aachen University and obtained her PhD degree at the Karlsruhe Institute of Technology about model-
ling of the deformation and failure behaviour of spot welds. She has been working at the Fraunhofer Institute
for Mechanics of Materials IWM in Freiburg since 2000 in the field of damage and failure modelling of materials
and joints for crash simulation. Since 2013 she is a group leader for joining and joints.

Date
176
Introduction to the Python Programming Language

Python is a modern programming language that is increasingly Basic concepts of the Python programming language
used in the field of Scientific Computing. Together with the Introduction to the language
environment scipy Python is an open source alternative to the Data and control structures, functions
commercial software MATLAB. A series of CAE software prod- Advanced topics
Processing of data
ucts, including the Pre-Processor ANSA, the solvers ABAQUS
Important modules of the Python standard library
and PAM-CRASH and the Post-Processor META, are already Examples from scientific computing
using Python as an integrated scripting language. Python puts Modularization in bigger Python projects
the emphasis on well-readable code, so beginners can learn Practical exercises
the language very quickly. Nevertheless, Python is a powerful
programming language and can also be used for larger proj-
ects. Further advantages of Python are the platform indepen-
dence and the very extensive standard library supplied.
Course Objectives
The seminar provides a comprehensive introduction to the
basics of the Python programming language. It also includes
an introduction to object-oriented programming. Practical
exercises, such as processing text-based files from the CAE
world, will be treated. After the seminar, participants will be
able to acquaint themselves with the Python interfaces of CAE
software products.
Who should attend?

The seminar is aimed at newcomers to the Python language.
Experience in other scripting or programming languages
would be an advantage but is not a requirement.
Dr. André Backes (TECOSIM Technische Simulation GmbH) studied Mathematics at the Uni-
Instructor
versity of Duisburg. From 2000 to 2006 he was a researcher at the Institute for Mathematics at the Humboldt
University in Berlin. His PhD studies at the chair for Numerical Mathematics introduced him to the field of CAE.
Since 2006 he works at TECOSIM GmbH in Ruesselsheim and among other topics specialized in NVH. In the
area of Virtual Benchmarking he helped developing the TECOSIM-owned process TEC|BENCH where also the
Python language was used. In current research projects he investigates the use of Python-based methods for
data analysis and machine learning in the CAE process.

Date
177
NEW
Python based Machine Learning Further Seminars on the Topic
with Automotive Applications

Machine Learning & Artificial Intelligence
 page 136
Course Description discuss possible applications in CAE or testing. An important

The topic of Artificial Intelligence (AI) is currently becoming aspect of data analysis is the extraction of features from CAE
more and more important, in particular in areas where pro- or testing data for the use in Machine Learning. After the semi-
cesses are automated and many data are processed. Espe- nar participants will be able to tackle the implementation of
cially in automotive area as well in the virtual development their own tasks. This also includes evaluating various methods
process as in the field of testing, numerous applications are of machine learning regarding their applicability to one’s own
conceivable in this context. A part of Artificial Intelligence is tasks and to deepen the methods based on the discussed
Machine Llearning, which is becoming increasingly important Python packages.
in addition to classical rule-based expert systems. This current
development is due to the generation of ever-larger datasets Who should attend?
(big data) as well as more powerful computers for their pro- The seminar addresses participants coming from CAE or test-
cessing. Especially in the automotive environment, extensive ing field who want to take the first steps in Machine Learning
data are generated in the context of simulation or testing, for based on their Python knowledge. It is assumed that basic
which an automated analysis is often sought. In addition to Python knowledge - e.g. as it is conveyed in the carhs.training
the classical interpretation of individual simulation or testing seminar Introduction to the Python Programming Language of
results, the methods of Machine Learning allow a new view at the same trainer - exists.
models and results. Based on the analysis of numerous results
(big data), e.g. from parameter studies, it is possible to derive
Artificial Intelligence using methods of Machine Learning, Course Contents
which is then used to evaluate further simulations or tests. Basics of data analysis with Python
Data structures
Python is currently the most popular programming language
Concepts of data preparation
for data analysis and Machine Learning. The freely available Extraction of features for Machine Learning methods
Python library Scikit-Learn provides a user-friendly entry to Data visualization
the relevant procedures. Especially the application of artificial The Python packages Numpy, Scipy, Pandas, Matplotlib
neural networks (Deep Learning) has become very popular Machine Learning with Python
lately. The software TensorFlow developed by Google and the Methods for classification and regression analysis
Python library Keras based on it provide a beginner-friendly The Python Package Scikit-Learn
access. Deep Learning and Neural Networks with Keras, TensorFlow
Applications motivated by CAE or testing background
Introductory examples
Course Objectives Discussion of possible deeper applications
The seminar gives an introduction to Machine Learning based Procedure for implementing your own ideas
on the programming language Python. This includes, as a
start, topics of data analysis, preparation and visualization.
In the second step, methods of machine learning are studied
using the Python packages Scikit-Learn and Keras or Tensor-
Flow. Practical exercises will deepen the topics discussed and
Dr. André Backes (TECOSIM Technische Simulation GmbH) studied Mathematics at the Uni-
Instructor
versity of Duisburg. From 2000 to 2006 he was a researcher at the Institute for Mathematics at the Humboldt
University in Berlin. His PhD studies at the chair for Numerical Mathematics introduced him to the field of CAE.
Since 2006 he works at TECOSIM GmbH in Ruesselsheim and among other topics specialized in NVH. In the
area of Virtual Benchmarking he helped developing the TECOSIM-owned process TEC|BENCH where also the
Python language was used. In current research projects he investigates the use of Python-based methods for
data analysis and machine learning in the CAE process.

Date
178
SAFETY
WISSEN
UPDATE
Important Abbreviations
A Level (Functional Safety) Trânsito
AAA American / Australian ASIS Adavanced Side Impact COP (1) Carry over Parts
Automobile Association System COP (2) Child Occupant Protection
AAAM Association for the ATD Anthropomorphic Test (Euro NCAP)
Advancement of Automotive Device COPD Child Occupant Presence
Medicine AZT Allianz Zentrum Technik Detection
AAM Alliance of Auto COS Completion of Steer
B
Manufacturers CP Contact Point
BAS Brake Assist
aBAS Advanced Brake Assist CPD Child Presence Detection
BASt Germany's Federal Highway
System CRABI Child Restraint Airbag
Research Institute
ACC Adaptive Cruise Control Interaction (Child Dummy)
BDA Bonnet Deployment Actuator
ACEA Association of European CRS Child Restraint System
BEV Battery Electric Vehicle
Automobile Manufacturers CSMA/CA Carrier Sense Multiple Access
BIS Bureau of Indian Standards
ACL Anterior cruciate ligament / Collision Avoidance
BLE Bonnet Leading Edge
ACN Automatic Collision CSMA/CD Carrier Sense Multiple Access
BMVI German Federal Ministry
Notification / Collision Detection
of Transport and Digital
ACSF Automatically Commanded CV Closing Velocity
Infrastructure
Steering Function CVFA Car to Vulnerable road user
BoD Board of Directors (Euro
ACU Airbag Control Unit Farside Adult
NCAP)
AD Automated Driving CVNA Car to Vulnerable road user
BOS Beginning of Steer
ADAC Allgemeiner Deutscher Nearside Adult
BRIC Brain Injury Criterion
Automobil Club (German CVNC Car to Vulnerable road user
BSD Blind Spot Detection
Automobile Association) Nearside Child
BST Blind Spot Technology
ADAS Advanced Driver Assistance BTA Bumper Test Area D
Systems DAS Data Acquisition System
ADL Automatic Door Locking C
DBS Dynamic Brake Support
ADOD Average Depth of C-IASI China Insurance Automotive
DCU Domain Control Unit
Deformation Safety Index
DGPS Differential Global Positioning
ADR Australian Design Rules C-NCAP China New Car Assessment
System
AE-MDB Advanced European Mobile Programme
DLO Daylight Opening
Deformable Barrier C2C Car-to-Car
DPPS Deployable Pedestrian
AEB Autonomous Emergency CA Crash Avoidance
Protection Systems
Braking CAE Computer Aided Engineering
DSM Driver Status Monitoring
AEBS Autonomous Emergency CAN Controller Area Network
DT Deployment Time
Brake System CAT Computer Aided Testing
AHB Auto High Beam CATARC China Automotive E
AHOD Average Height of Technology and Research EBA Emergency Brake Assist
Deformation Center EBA Effective Braking &
AHOF Average Height of Force CCD Charge Coupled Device Avoidance (ASEAN NCAP)
AHR Active Head Rest CCR Car to Car-Rear EBD Electronic Brake Force
AIS (1) Abbreviated Injury Scale CDC Collision Deformation Distribution
AIS (2) Automotive Industry Classification EBT Euro NCAP Bicyclist Target
Standards (India) CEA Comité Européen des ECE Economic Commision for
AISC Automotive Industry Assurances Europe (United Nations)
Standards Committee CFD Computational Fluid ECOSOC United Nations Economic
ANCAP Australasian New Car Dynamics and Social Council
Assessment Program CFR Code of Federal Regulations EDM Engineering Data
AOP Adult Occupant Protection (USA) Management
(Euro NCAP) CFRP Carbon Fiber Reinforced EES Energy Equivalent Speed
APF Abdominal Peak Force Plastic EEVC European Enhanced Vehicle-
APROSYS Advanced PROtection CIB Crash Imminent Braking Safety Committee
SYStems CLEPA Comité de liaison européen EIF Entry Into Force
APSS Active Pedestrian Safety des fabricants d’equipements ELK Emergency Lane Keeping
System et de pièces automobiles ELSA ELectric SAfety (UNECE/
ARAI Automotive Research CMM Coordinate Measuring WP.29 Working Group)
Association of India Machine EMC Electromagnetic
ARV Advanced Rear Visualization CMOS Complementary Metal Oxide Compatibility
ASCC Adaptive Speed Cruise Semiconductor EOU Ease of Use
Control CMVR Central Motor Vehicle Rules EPB Electrical Protection Barrier
ASIC Application-Specific CMVSS Canadian Motor Vehicle EPT Euro NCAP Pedestrian Target
Integrated Circuit Safety Standards ERG Emergency Response Guide
ASIL Automotive Safety Integrity COG Center of Gravity ES-2 re Euro SID 2 Rib Extension
CONTRAN Conselho Nacional de ESC Electronic Stability Control
179
SAFETY
WISSEN
UPDATE
ESV Enhanced Experimental H IWVTA International Whole Vehicle
Vehicles Safety Program / HAD Highly Automated Driving Type Approval
Enhanced Safety of Vehicles HAV Highly Automated Vehicle J
Program HBM Human Body Model J-MLIT Japan: Ministry of Land,
ETC European Test Consortium HGV Heavy Goods Vehicle Infrastructure and Transport
ETSC European Transport Safety HIC Head Injury Criterion JA Junction Assist
Council HIT Head Impact Time JAMA Japan Automotive
Euro NCAP European New Car HITS Harmonisation Interlab Test Manufacturers Association
Assessment Programme Series JARI Japan Automobile Research
EVPC Electric Vehicles Post Crash HLDI Highway Loss Data Institute Institute
EVS Electric Vehicle Safety HLLC High Level Liaison Committee JASIC Japan Automobile Standards
EVT Euro NCAP Vehicle Target HMI Human Machine Interface Internationalization Center
F HNI Head Neck Impactor JNCAP Japan New Car Assessment
FARS Fatality Analysis Reporting HOF Height of Force Program
System HPC Head Performance Criterion
HPM H-Point Manikin K
FCEV Fuel Cell Electric Vehicle
HPS Head Protection System KMVSS Korean Motor Vehicle Safety
FCW Forward Collision Warning
HPT Head Protection Technology Standards
FCWS Forward Collision Warning
HRC Time to Head Restraint first KNCAP Korean New Car Assessment
System
Contact Program
FEM Finite Element Method
HRMD Head Restraint Measuring KTH Knee - Thigh - Hip
FFC Femur Force Criterion
FIWG Frontal Impact Working Device L
Group (Euro NCAP) HRV Head Rebound Velocity LDWS Lane Departure Warning
Flex PLI Flexible Pedestrian Legform HTD Hardest to detect System
Impactor HV High Voltage LHD Left Hand Drive
FMH Free Motion Headform I LIDAR Light Detection and Ranging
(FMVSS 201) IARV Injury Assessment Reference LIN Local Interconnect Network
FMVSS Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Value LINCAP Lateral Impact New Car
Standards IBRL Internal Bumper Reference Assessment Program (U.S.
FPS Frontal Protection System Line NCAP)
FPSLE Frontal Protection System ICPL Injury Criteria Protection LKAS Lane Keeping Assist System
Leading Edge Level LKD Lane Keeping Device
FRG Floating Rib Guide ICRT International Consumer LKS Lane Keeping System
FRP Fiber Reinforced Plastic Research and Testing LL Lower Leg
FRS Fitment Rating System IG Informal Group LNL Lower Neck Load
(ASEAN NCAP) IHC Intelligent Headlight Control LSS Lane Support System
FSI Fluid-Structure-Interaction IHRA International Harmonized LTR Land Transport Rules (New
FTDMA Flexible Time Division Research Activities Zeeland)
Multiple Access IIHS Insurance Institute for M
FW Full Width Highway Safety MAIS Maximum AIS (Abbreviated
FWDB Full Width Deformable IIWPG International Insurance Injury Scale)
Barrier Whiplash Prevention Group MCB Multi Collision Brake
FWRB Full Width Rigid Barrier INRETS Institut National de MCL Medial Collateral Ligament
G Recherche sur les Transports MDB Mobile Deformable Barrier
G.S.R. General Statutory Rules et leur Sécurité MoD Motor own Damage
GAMBIT Generalized Acceleration INSIA Instituto Universitario de (Insurance)
Model for Brain Injury Investigación del Automóvil MOST Media Oriented Systems
Threshold IP Intersection Point Transport
GCS Glasgow Coma Scale IRC Injury Risk Curve MPDB Moving Progressive
GIDAS German in-Depth Accident IRCOBI International Research Deformable Barrier
Study Council on the Biomechanics MSA Manual Speed Assist
GRSG Groupe de Rapporteurs sur of Impact MST Motorcyclist Safety
la Sécurité Générale (WP.29 - IRF Injury Risk Function Technology
General Safety Provisions) ISA Intelligent Speed Assistance MTBI Mild Traumatic Brain Injury
GRSP Groupe de Rapporteurs sur ISM Intelligent Speed MVWG Motor Vehicle Working
la Sécurité Passive (WP.29 - Management Group (EU)
Passive Safety) ISO International Organization for
Standardization N
GSR General Safety Regulation NASS National Automotive
GTR Global Technical Regulation ISS Injury Severity Score
ITC Inland Transport Committee Sampling System
GVM Gross Vehicle Mass NASS CDS NASS Crashworthiness Data
GVT Global Vehicle Target (UNECE)
System
GVWR Gross Vehicle Weight Rating
180
SAFETY
WISSEN
UPDATE
NASS GES NASS General Estimates PPAD Partner Protection ToPI Time of Pedestrian
System Assessment Deformation Identification
NASVA National Agency for PSPF Pubic Symphysis Peak Force TOR Takeover Request
Automotive Safety & Victims‘ PTS Poly Trauma Score TPL Third Party Liability
Aid (Japan) PTW Powered Two Wheeler (Insurance)
NCAP New Car Assessment TREAD Transportation Recall,
R
Program Enhancement, Accountability
Radar Radio Detection and Ranging
NCSA National Center for Statistics and Documentation
RCAR Research Council for
and Analysis (an Office of TRL Transport Research
Automobile Repairs
NHTSA) Laboratory (UK)
RCTA Rear Cross Traffic Alert
NHTSA National Highway Traffic TRT Total Reaction/Response
REX Range Extender
Safety Administration (USA) Time
RFCRS Rearward Facing Child
NIC Neck Injury Criterion TSP Top Safety Pick (IIHS)
Restraint System
NISS New Injury Severity Score TT Top Tether
RHD Right Hand Drive
NNT Number Needed to Treat TTB Time to Brake
RID Rear Impact Dummy
NPACS New Programme for the TTC Time to Collision
RR Repeatability &
Assessment of Child-restraint TTD Time to Decision
Reproducibility
Systems TTI Thoracic Trauma Index
NPRM Notice of Proposed Rule S TTS Time to Steer
Making (USA) S.O Statutory Order
SA Safety Assist (Euro NCAP)
U
NTSEL National Traffic Safety and
U.S. NCAP United States New Car
Environment Laboratory SAE Society of Automotive
Assessment Program
(Japan) Engineers
UBM Upper Body Mass
SAS Speed Assistance System
O SAT Safety Assist Technology
UL Upper Leg
OC Occipital Condyles UMTRI University of Michigan
SB Seat Back
ODB Offset Deformable Barrier Transportation Research
SBR Seat Belt Reminder
OICA Organisation Internationale Institute
SD Standard Deviation
des Constructeurs UN United Nations
SEAS Secondary Energy Absorbing
d’Automobiles USCAR The United States Council for
Structure
OLC Occupant Load Criterion Automotive Research
SgRP Seating Reference Point
OMDB Oblique Moving Deformable UUT Unit Under Test
SID Side Impact Dummy
Barrier
SLD Speed Limitation Device V
OoP Out of Position
SLIF Speed Limit Information VAN Vehicle Area Network
OSM Occupant Status Monitoring
Function VC Viscous Criterion
P SOB Small Overlap Barrier (IIHS) VDC Vehicle Dynamics Control
PADI Procedures for the assembly SRA Swedish Road Administration VERPS Vehicle Related Pedestrian
disassembly and inspection SRP Seat Reference Point Safety
PAEB Pedestrian Automatic SRS Supplementary Restraint VR Virtual Reality
Emergency Braking System VRTC Vehicle Research & Test
PCL Posterior Cruciate Ligament SSF Static Stability Factor (U.S. Center (NHTSA)
PDB (1) Partnership for NCAP, KNCAP) VRU Vulnerable Road User
Dummytechnology and SSR Speed Sign Recognition VSS Vehicle Safety Score (U.S.
Biomechanics ST Sensing Time NCAP)
PDB (2) Progressive Deformable STNI Soft Tissue Neck Injury
W
Barrier SUFEHM Strasbourg University Finite
WAD (1) Wrap Around Distance
PDC Park Distance Control Element Head Model
WAD (2) Whiplash Associated
PDI Pedestrian Detection SUV Sports Utility Vehicle
Disorders
Impactor SWR Strength-to-weight Ratio
WG Working Group
PEAS Primary Energy Absorbing (Roof Crush)
WP Working Party
Structure
T WS World SID
PLI Pedestrian Legform Impactor
TA Type Approval WS5F World SID 5th%ile Female
PMA Parking and Maneuvering
TCMV Technical Committee - Motor Dummy
Assistant
Vehicles (EU) WSTC Wayne State University
PMD Photonic Mixer Device
TEG Technical Evaluation Group Tolerance Curve
PMHS Post Mortem Human
TF BTA Task Force Bumper Test Area WSU Wayne State University
Subjects
ThCC Thoracic Compression
PMTO Post Mortal Test Object
Criterion, also TCC
PNCAP Primary New Car Assessment
THOR Test Device for Human
Programme
Occupant Restraint
PoC Point of Collision
THUMS Total Human Model for
PP Pedestrian Protection
Safety
PPA Pedestrian Protection Airbag
TIPT Thorax Injury Prediction Tool
181
carhs.training
Terms & Conditions
Registration obtain a refund for the fees already paid, further entitlements are
You can register for seminars directly via our webpage www.carhs. excluded.
de or send us the completed and signed registration form by mail
Liability
or fax.
Naturally the lecturers express their personal opinions, and infor-
By signing the registration or by transmitting the e-mail/internet-
mation and data are published or made available. We cannot
registration the participant accepts the terms of participation.
assume liability for the content of the information given, or for the
Your registration data are saved for internal purposes.
data, or for the success of the seminar. We are not liable for the
Confirmation of registration/invoice loss of or damage to objects brought to the seminar, unless the
Immediately after receipt of the registration you obtain a written damaging of this object can be ascribed to deliberate or negligent
confirmation of registration and an invoice. Invoices need to be behaviour by our employees or other auxiliary persons. We thus
paid within 30 days from the issuing date of the invoice, however, kindly ask you to not leave valuables or important materials in the
not later than 7 days before the beginning of the seminar, without seminar room during breaks. We do not guarantee that the prod-
deductions. We reserve the right to exclude participants who have ucts, procedures and names mentioned in seminars and manuals
not paid in time from the participation in the seminar. are free from industrial property rights.
Participation fee Copyright
The participation fee for one seminar is in Euro per person plus The manuals distributed within our seminars are copyrighted and
VAT and includes training material, participation certificate, drinks must not – not even in extracts – be copied or used commercially
during breaks and lunch. without the consent of carhs.training gmbh and the respective
Since the place of provision of seminars held in Germany is inland, lecturers.
participants from abroad have to pay VAT too (it may however be
Seminars held by our Partner Companies
possible to apply for a refunding of the purchase tax at the Federal
For Seminars organized by our partners BGS Böhme & Gehring
Tax Office). A partial participation in our seminars does not entitle
GmbH, Batteryuniversity GmbH and Vogel Communications
to a reduction in the participation fee.
Group GmbH & Co. KG, carhs acts as an agent only. For these
Discount for universities and public reasearch institutions Seminars only the terms and conditions of our partner apply.
Universities and public research institutions receive a 40 % dis-
Applicable law/Jurisdiction
count on seminar fees.
The contract is subject to German law.
Number of participants For businessmen in the sense of HGB (German Commercial Code)
The number of participants is limited in order to ensure an effi- the following applies: Jurisdiction for all claims and litigations
cient realization of the seminar. Registrations are considered in the resulting from the contractual relationship, including special pro-
order of their arrival. An early registration is thus recommended. cedures deciding claims arising out of a bill of exchange or sum-
In the case of additional registrations we try to set an alternative mary procedures, is Aschaffenburg.
date.
Cancellation
The cancellation of the registration is possible free of charge until
4 weeks before the beginning of the seminar. In the case of a
cancellation until 2 weeks before the beginning of the seminar we Imprint
have to charge a fixed charge of EUR 100. In the case of a later Published by
cancellation or if the participant does not attend the seminar, the carhs.training gmbh, Siemensstrasse 12, D-63755 Alzenau, Germany
full amount has to be paid. For conferences and seminars listed in Tel. +49 (0) 6023-9640-60, Fax +49 (0) 6023-9640-70
the category 'Events' the following terms apply for cancellations: Managing Directors: Constantin Hoffmann, Rainer Hoffmann
Commercial Register: Aschaffenburg HRB 9961
The cancellation of the registration is possible free of charge until
4 weeks before the beginning of the seminar. In the case of a Copyright
cancellation until 2 weeks before the beginning of the seminar we © 2020 by carhs.training gmbh. All details, including but not limited to,
charge 50 % of the seminar fee. In the case of a later cancellation illustrations, product descriptions and documents published in this book are
the sole property of carhs gmbh. Any copying or distribution in whole or in
or if the participant does not attend the seminar, the full amount parts is subject to a written permit by carhs gmbh. All rights reserved. carhs is a
has to be paid. registered trademark of carhs gmbh
Replacement participant Liability
It is possible at any point to register a substitute participant for the No warranty is given, either expressly or tacitly, for the completeness or
correctness of the information in this publication or on websites referred to in
registered participant. The same terms of participation as for the this publication. We can and will not be liable for any damages arising from the
registered participant apply for him or her. use or in connection with the use of the information in this publication, being
direct or indirect damages, consequential damages and/or, but not limited to,
Cancellation or postponing of a seminar damages such as loss of profit or loss of data. We reserve the right of changes
of the information contained without previous announcement. We can and
We reserve the right to cancel or postpone seminars for organ- will not be held liable nor responsible for the information contained in and on
isational reasons (e.g. if the minimum number of participants is webpages referred to in this publication. Furthermore we declare, that we do
not have any influence, outside of our domain, for the pages presented in the
not achieved). In the case of a cancellation we try to book you to Internet. Should any illegal information be spread via one of our links, please be
another date and/or location, if you should wish so. Otherwise you so kind to inform us immediately, to enable us to remove said link.
182
Index
Index D Golowko, Kai 79

Grid Method 102
Data Acquisition 114, 116
A Data-based Development 137 Groesch, Lothar 87
Deep Learning 136 GTR 7 108
Abbreviations 179, 180, 181
Design of Experiments 168 GTR 9 98
ACL 124
Dobberstein, Mirko 117 GTR 14 88
Active Safety 127, 128
ADR 20 Driver Assistance 127, 128, 136
AEB 128, 130, 143, 144, 146, 148, 149, Dual Rating 46 H
150, 152, 154, 155, 157, 160 Duddeck, Fabian 168 Hannawald, Lars 117
AEB Car-to-Car 152 Dummy 118, 122, 123 Harzheim, Lothar 170
AEB Pedestrian 157 Head Impact 96, 97
Airbag 82 E Head Injury Criteria 165
ANCAP 32, 46, 132 eCall 45 Headlights 141
aPLI 124 Efficiency 171 HIC 120
Artificial Intelligence 136, 178 Eickhoff, Burkhard 86 Hinterhölzl, Roland 172
ASEAN NCAP 29, 30, 61, 110, 128, Ejection Mitigation 94 Hoffmann, Rainer 16
132 Electric Vehicles 22, 25 Hübner, Sandro 82
ASV 130 Emergency Lane Keeping 155, 156 Human Modeling 164
Automated Driving 127, 134, 136 Emergency Steering Support 144, Hybrid III (HIII) 118
Auto[nom]Mobil 141 148, 154
AZT 112 ES-2 118 I
ESC 127, 128, 142, 156 IIHS 28, 30, 52, 76, 88, 107, 130, 132,
B Euro NCAP 27, 30, 32, 46, 88, 98, 102, 157
Bachem, Harald 17 106, 109 IIWPG 107, 108
Backes, André 177, 178 Euro SID 118 Inhouse Seminars 12
BASt 138 Extrication 45 Injury Risk Curves 49
Battery Safety 22 Insurance Tests 112
Baumgärtner, Timo 169 F Interior Development 169
Bharat NCAP 30, 72 Far Side Occupant 42
BioRID 118 Finck, Maren 104 J
Brain Injury Criterion 120 Flex PLI 100, 124, 126 JNCAP 29, 30, 65, 66, 98, 130, 132
BrIC 120 FMVSS 126 142 Joints 176
Bumper Test 112 FMVSS 201 96, 97 Justen, Rainer 22
FMVSS 208 78, 80
C FMVSS 214 88, 89, 90 K
CAE Grand Challenge 162 FMVSS 216a 76 Karall, Thomas 173
Child Occupant Protection 109 FMVSS 225 74 Kinsky, Thomas 18
China 13 FMVSS 226 94 KMVSS 20, 21
C-IASI 29, 30 FMVSS 305 24 KNCAP 29, 68, 69, 70, 98, 111, 130,
CMVSS 208 80 Foams 175 132
C-NCAP 29, 30, 62, 64, 130, 132, 160 Forward Collision Warning 130, 158 Knee Mapping 40
Commercial Vehicles 17 Frank, Thomas 108 Knee Modifier 40
Compatibility 36, 38 Frontal Impact 32, 39, 58, 78, 80, 83 Kolling, Stefan 175
Composites 172, 173 Front Crash Prevention 157 Kuhn, Andreas 136, 137
Crash Imminent Braking 158 Fuel Cell 22
Crash-Sensing 87 L
Crash Simulation 173, 174, 175, 176 G Lane Departure Warning 130, 155
Crashworthiness 75 Gärtner, Torsten 97 Lane Keep Assist 155
Creamer, John 18, 26, 134 Gese, Helmut 174
183
Index
Latin NCAP 28, 30, 57, 61, 110, 128, Q T

132
Q-Dummy 110, 118, 122 Table of Contents 8
Lightweight Design 75, 166, 172
Terms & Conditions 182
Lohrmann, Hans-Georg 73
R THOR 120, 123
Rating 50, 61 Top Safety Pick 53
M Turn Across Path 154
RCAR 112
Machine Learning 136, 178 Type Approval 18
Rear Automatic Braking 159
Martellucci, Alexander 74
Rear Seat 85, 86
Material Models 173, 174, 175
Regulations 18, 19, 20, 134 U
MCL 124
Rescue 45 UN R12 74
Metals 174
Rescue Sheet 45 UN R14 74
Model Order Reduction 168
Response Surface Methods 168 UN R21 96, 97
MPDB 32, 38
Restraint System 82, 86 UN R29 17
Müller, Gerd 127
Risk 171 UN R94 20, 25
Multi Collision Brake 45
Robust Design 168 UN R95 21, 25, 88
Multi-point Thoracic Injury Criterion
Robustness 168, 170 UN R100 25
120
Rollover 130 UN R127 98, 100
MUSE 149
Roof Crush 74, 76 UN R130 17
Rother, Klemens 171 UN R131 17
N UN R135 21
NCAP 28, 30, 32, 48, 49, 50, 132, 140 S UN Regulations 113
Neural Networks 136 Urban Mobility 141
SAE 138
NHTSA 18, 138 U.S. NCAP 28, 30, 48, 49, 50, 88, 130,
Safety Belt 82
SafetyExpo 14 132, 158, 159
O SafetyLighting 141
Occupant Protection 16, 86 Safety Summit Shanghai 13 V
Occupant to Occupant Protection 44 SafetyTesting 114 Validation 136, 137
OLC 36 SafetyUpDate 15 Vehicle Classification 113
Optimization 168, 170 SafetyWeek 14 Vehicle Safety Score 50
Sandner, Volker 38, 40 VRU 143, 144, 146, 148
P Scenario-based Development 137
Passive Safety 16 Schimmelpfennig, Peter 117 W
PCL 124 Schumacher, Axel 75 Weyde, Michael 117
P-Dummy 118 Seat Adjustments 90 Whiplash 105, 106, 108
Pedestrian Protection 98, 104, 124, Seat Belt 82 Wild, Thomas 116
126 Seeck, Andre 30, 140 Willinger, Rémy 165
Peeters Weem, Bart 92 Self-Certification 26 Wolter, Stephanie 92
Plastics 169, 175 Seminar Guide 6 WorldSID 90, 118, 123
Pole Side Impact 88 Sensors 87, 116
Post Crash 45 SID 118
Powered Two Wheelers 149 Side Impact 41, 88, 90, 92, 93
PraxisConference Pedestrian Protec- SID-IIs 118
tion 99 Sine with Dwell 142
PraxisConference Safety Assist 133 Slowly-Increasing-Steer 142
PRIMUS-Dummy 117 Small Overlap 54, 56
Product Liability 26, 73 Sommer, Silke 176
Programming 177 Static Vehicle Safety Tests 74
Python 177, 178 SUFEHM 165
184
Seminar Calendar 2020
January February March
1 We New Year 1 Sa 1 Su
2 Th 2 Su 2 Mo Static Vehicle Safety Tests p. 74 p. 30
3 Fr 3 Mo 3 Tu NCAP- New Car Assessment Programs
4 Sa 4 Tu 4 We
5 Su 5 We 5 Th Material Models Composites p. 173
6 Mo Epiphany 6 Th 6 Fr
7 Tu 7 Fr 7 Sa
8 We 8 Sa 8 Su
9 Th 9 Su 9 Mo International Safety and
10 Fr 10 Mo 10 Tu Crash-Test Regulations: p. 18
11 Sa 11 Tu 11 We Modeling of Joints p. 176
12 Su 12 We Whiplash Testing p. 108 12 Th Rear Seat Occupant Protection in Frontal Impact p. 86
13 Mo 13 Th 13 Fr
Robust Design
14 Tu 14 Fr p. 168 14 Sa
15 We 15 Sa 15 Su
16 Th 16 Su 16 Mo
17 Fr 17 Mo Product Liability Pedestrian Protection p. 104 17 Tu Introduction to the Python
18 Sa 18 Tu p. 73 18 We Programming Language p. 117
19 Su 19 We Introduction to Passive Structural Optimi- 19 Th
20 Mo 20 Th Safety of Vehicles p. 16 zation p. 170 20 Fr
21 Tu 21 Fr 21 Sa
22 We 22 Sa 22 Su
23 Th 23 Su 23 Mo
24 Fr 24 Mo 24 Tu
25 Sa 25 Tu 25 We Lightweight Design Summit 2020 p. 166
26 Su 26 We 26 Th Crash Safety of Hybrid and
27 Mo 27 Th 27 Fr Electric Vehicles p. 22
NVH www
28 Tu 28 Fr Design for Durability www 28 Sa
29 We 29 Sa 29 Su
30 Th 30 Mo Crash-Sensing Systems p. 87
31 Fr 31 Tu Design of Composite Structures p. 172
April May June

1 We Design of Composite Structures 1 Fr
p. 172 Labor Day 1 Mo Pentecost
2 Th 2 Sa 2 Tu
3 Fr Head Impact on Vehicle Interiors p. 97 3 Su 3 We International Safety and
4 Sa 4 Mo Introduction to Active Safety p. 127 p. 75 4 Th Crash-Test Regulations p. 18
5 Su 5 Tu Crashworthy & Lightweight Car Body Design 5 Fr
6 Mo 6 We Python based Machine Learning p. 178 6 Sa
7 Tu 7 Th 7 Su
8 We 8 Fr 8 Mo Restraint System Components p. 82
9 Th 9 Sa 9 Tu
10 Fr Good Friday 10 Su 10 We
11 Sa 11 Mo 11 Th Corpus Christi
12 Su Easter 12 Tu 12 Fr
13 Mo Easter 13 We SafetyWeek 2020 p. 14 13 Sa
14 Tu 14 Th 14 Su
15 We 15 Fr 15 Mo Development - Frontal Restraint Systems
16 Th 16 Sa 16 Tu meeting Legal & Consumer Protection p. 79
17 Fr 17 Su 17 We NCAP - New Car Introduction to
18 Sa 18 Mo 18 Th Assessment Prog. p. 140 Passive Safety p. 16
19 Su 19 Tu 19 Fr Head Impact on Vehicle Interiors p. 97
20 Mo 20 We 20 Sa
21 Tu p. 162 21 Th Ascension of Christ 21 Su
automotive CAE Grand Challenge 2020
22 We 22 Fr 22 Mo Artificial Intelligence and Machine Learning
23 Th Side Impact- Requirements 23 Sa 23 Tu for Advanced Driver Assistance Systems p. 136
24 Fr and Development Strategies p. 92 24 Su 24 We 15. PraxisConference
25 Sa 25 Mo Product Liability in the 25 Th Pedestrian Protection p. 99
26 Su 26 Tu Automobile Industry p. 73 26 Fr
27 Mo 27 We Introduction to Passive Safety of Vehicles 27 Sa
28 Tu 28 Th Material Models - Metals p. 174 p. 16 28 Su
29 We 29 Fr 29 Mo Introduction to Data Acquisition
30 Th 30 Sa 30 Tu in Safety Testing p. 116
31 Su Pentecost
Alzenau Hanau Landsberg a. Lech Würzburg Gaimersheim Bergisch-Gladbach

Seminar Calendar 2020
July August September
1 We 1 Sa 1 Tu Introduction to Passive Safety of Vehicles p.16
2 Th Crash Safety of Hybrid 2 Su 2 We Praxisconference
3 Fr and Electric Vehicles p. 22 3 Mo 3 Th Safety Assist 2020 p. 133 p. 168
4 Sa 4 Tu 4 Fr Robust Design - Vehicle Development Uncertainty
5 Su 5 We 5 Sa
6 Mo 6 Th 6 Su
7 Tu 7 Fr 7 Mo
8 We Side Impact- Requirements and 8 Sa 8 Tu Crashworthy and Lightweight
9 Th Development Strategies p. 92 9 Su 9 We Car Body Design p. 75
10 Fr 10 Mo 10 Th
11 Sa 11 Tu 11 Fr
12 Su 12 We 12 Sa
13 Mo 13 Th 13 Su
14 Tu 14 Fr 14 Mo Modeling of Joints in Crash Simulation p.176
15 We 15 Sa 15 Tu SafetyUpDate Graz 2020
16 Th Automotive Safety Summit 16 Su 16 We Whiplash p. 108 www
17 Fr Shanghai 2020 www 17 Mo 17 Th NVH- Background, Practice and
18 Sa 18 Tu 18 Fr Simulation Methodology www
19 Su 19 We 19 Sa
20 Mo 20 Th 20 Su
21 Tu 21 Fr 21 Mo
22 We 22 Sa 22 Tu Material Models of Plastics
23 Th 23 Su 23 We and Foams p. 175
24 Fr 24 Mo 24 Th Commercial Vehicles p. 17 PRIMUS p. 117
25 Sa 25 Tu 25 Fr
26 Su 26 We 26 Sa
27 Mo 27 Th 27 Su
28 Tu 28 Fr 28 Mo Crash-Sensing Systems p.87
29 We 29 Sa 29 Tu Product Liability in the Automobile Industry p. 73
30 Th 30 Su 30 We
31 Fr 31 Mo
October November December

1 Th 1 Su All Saints 1 Tu NCAP p. 30
2 Fr Material Models of Composites p. 173 2 Mo 2 We Python based Machine Learning
3 Sa German National Holiday 3 Tu 3 Th with Automotive Applications p. 178
4 Su 4 We Static Vehicle Safety Tests in Dev. p. 74 4 Fr
5 Mo Pedestrian Protection - Dev. Strategies p. 104 5 Th Crash Safety of Hybrid and Frontal Restraint 5 Sa
6 Tu 6 Fr Electric Vehicles p. 22 Systems p. 79 6 Su
7 We 7 Sa 7 Mo Crashworthy and Lightweight
8 Th Material Models of Metals p. 174 8 Su 8 Tu Car Body Design p. 75
9 Fr 9 Mo Introduction to Active Safety of Vehicles p. 127 9 We
10 Sa 10 Tu International Safety and Scenario-, Simulation- and 10 Th
11 Su 11 We Crash-Test Regul. p. 18 Data-based Dev. p. 137 11 Fr
12 Mo Design Maturity of Restraint System Comp. p. 82 12 Th 12 Sa
13 Tu 13 Fr 13 Su
Vehicle Safety under Self-Certification p. 26
14 We 14 Sa 14 Mo
15 Th Worldwide Automated Vehicle Policies p. 134 15 Su 15 Tu
Euro NCAP UpDate 2020
16 Fr Head Impact FMVSS 201 & UN R21 p. 97 16 Mo Introduction to the Python 16 We p. 27
17 Sa 17 Tu Programming Language p.177 17 Th
18 Su 18 We Passive Safety Head Injury Criteria p. 165 18 Fr
19 Mo 19 Th p. 16 Human Modeling 19 Sa
20 Tu 20 Fr and Simulation in Automotive Engineering p. 164 20 Su
21 We 21 Sa 21 Mo
22 Th 22 Su 22 Tu
23 Fr 23 Mo Structural Optimization in Automotive Design 23 We
24 Sa 24 Tu – Theory and Application p. 170 24 Th Christmas Eve
25 Su 25 We Rear Seat p. 86 ISO 26262 www 25 Fr Christmas
26 Mo 26 Th 26 Sa Christmas
27 Tu AI & Machine Learning- p. 136 Side Impact 27 Fr 27 Su
28 We Automated Driving p. 92 28 Sa 28 Mo
29 Th 29 Su 29 Tu
30 Fr 30 Mo Design f. Durability www NCAP p. 30 30 We
31 Sa 31 Th New Year´s Eve
Alzenau Shanghai Frankfurt Wiesbaden Tappenbeck Bergisch-Gladbach wird noch bekannt gegeben
Instron Advances EV Safety Testing
Innovative Solutions For Sled Testing

of Vehicle Battery Modules and Packs
including:
Upgrades to Existing Systems
Operator and Facility Safety
Instron GmbH
Schenck Technologie- und Industriepark
Landwehrstraße 65
64293 Darmstadt

SafetyCompanion 2020 en

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

SafetyCompanion 2020 en

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

SafetyCompanion 2020 en

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

SAFETY

SEMINARS CONFERENCES KNOWLEDGE

Dummy & Crash Test

Page 114 - 126

Your first choice when it comes to reliable

Page 162 - 178

GTR § UN ECE § JNCAP

Frontal Impact Pedestrian Protection

Regulations and Requirements Accident Avoidance, Automated Driving

Haven’t found what you need?

4 SafetyWissen Navigator 73 Seminar: Product Liability in the Automobile

Do not take vehicle safety for granted

For the whole team of carhs.training

Rainer Hoffmann Ralf Reuter

Seminars at carhs.training - Your Benefits

Free parking for seminar attendees

Free use of the charging station

Seminar materials on paper & as PDF file

Fair cancellation policy

Early bird rates reduce your costs

All-round catering during the seminar

Small group sizes for maximum learning success

1 Day Seminar 2 Day Seminar

Your contacts at carhs.training

Dr. Dirk Ulrich Sofia Antoniadou

Safety Technologies for the intelligent,

Who should attend?

DATE 16.-17. July 2020

VENUE Shanghai, China

LANGUAGE English / Chinese with simultaneous translation

Supporting automotive development engineers to further

Who should attend?

DATE 12.-14. May 2020

VENUE VCC Vogel Convention Center, Würzburg

LANGUAGE German with translation into English

PRICE from 890 EUR (single day)

Active + Passive Safety = SafetyUpDate+active

Conference Topics include:

From Experts for Experts

Meeting Point: Expert Dialog

Who should attend?

DATE 13.-14. May 2020 15.-16. September 2020

HOMEPAGE www.carhs.de/update www.carhs.de/gsu

VENUE VCC Vogel Convention Center, Würzburg Technische Universität Graz

Introduction to Passive Safety of Vehicles

Course Description Who should attend?

Rainer Hoffmann (carhs.training gmbh)

has been involved in automotive safety throughout his

DATE COURSE ID VENUE DURATION PRICE LANGUAGE

Safety of Commercial Vehicles

Course Description Who should attend?

DATE COURSE ID VENUE DURATION PRICE LANGUAGE

International Safety and Crash-Test Regulations:

John Creamer (GlobalAutoRegs.com) is the founder of GlobalAutoRegs.com and a partner in The

DATE COURSE ID VENUE DURATION PRICE LANGUAGE

Crash-Regulations: Europe, United Nations, USA, China and India

THE AUTOMOTIVE RESEARCH

ISO 17025 India’s premier automotive

Comprehensive passive safety test facilities – ®

Find out the current state of discussion on the upcoming protocols.

SSF Roof Crush

Flex PLI, aPLI Flex PLI

Upper Legfom Upper Legfom

Frontal MPDB Frontal ODB

FCW, LDW, AEB, DBS,

Curtain Airbag Roof Crush SSF

Flex PLI, aPLI

Flex PLI Flex PLI, aPLI Flex PLI Upper Legform

Q3 in Full Width Frontal

Dynamic Static Static

SBR, AEB, LSS, Rear SBR, FCW, LDW,