Anthropomorphic Test Dummy; Occupant Crash Protection

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

49 CFR Part 572

[Docket No. NHTSA-99-5156]

RIN 2127-AG78

Anthropomorphic Test Dummy; Occupant Crash Protection

AGENCY: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA),

Department of Transportation.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: This document proposes to adopt design and performance

specifications for a new 12-month-old infant dummy. The new dummy is

especially needed to evaluate the effects of air bag deployment on

children who are not properly positioned at the time of a crash, i.e.,

out-of-position. It would also provide greater and more useful

information in a variety of crash environments to better evaluate child

safety. Adopting the dummy would be the first step toward using it to

evaluate the safety of air bags for infants and very young children.

The separate issue of specifying use of the dummy in determining

compliance with performance tests, e.g., as part of the occupant

protection standard and/or child restraint standard, will be addressed

in other rulemakings, most notably the proposed advanced air bag

rulemaking.

DATES: You should submit your comments early enough to ensure that

Docket Management receives them not later than April 22, 1999.

ADDRESSES: You should mention the docket number of this document in

your comments and submit your comments in writing to: Docket

Management, Room PL-401, 400 Seventh Street, S.W., Washington, D.C.,

20590.

You may call the Docket at 202-366-9324. You may visit the Docket

from 10:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m., Monday through Friday.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For non-legal issues, you may call

Stan Backaitis, Office of Crashworthiness Standards, at 202-366-4912.

For legal issues, you may call Rebecca MacPherson, Office of the

Chief Counsel, at 202-366-2992.

You may send mail to both of these officials at National Highway

Traffic Safety Administration, 400 Seventh St., S.W., Washington, D.C.,

20590.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Air bag fatalities of children have raised

serious concerns about how best to evaluate their safety in a variety

of crash environments. We are working with the automotive industry to

assure greater safety in motor vehicles through the development,

evaluation and application of significantly improved occupant

protection technologies. As part of our overall program to achieve

greater safety, we are developing new and improved test devices to

evaluate the relationship between observed injuries and the forces

causing them. One of the new test devices is a 12-month-old infant

dummy.

In 1990 the Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE) began the

development of a 12-month-old infant dummy designed to evaluate a very

young child's interaction with an air bag. At that time, the SAE Child

Restraint Air Bag Interaction (CRABI) Task Force requested the SAE

Mechanical Human Simulation Subcommittee to address the need for a new

infant dummy that could be used in testing and evaluating the effects

of child restraints and air bags, as well as their interaction, on

infants. The CRABI Task Force had determined that the biofidelity and

impact response of the existing infant dummies were inadequate and that

those dummies were not suitable for modification or retrofit. In view

of the deficiencies in those dummies, the task force concluded that an

entirely new dummy was needed. The new dummy was to be capable of

evaluating both rear facing and forward facing child restraints, as

well as the injury potential of air bags for out-of-position children.

The SAE subsequently developed the CRABI 12-month-old infant dummy.

Our initial review of the results of tests with the dummy in 1996

indicated serious structural and performance deficiencies that

prevented it from being a stable and objective test device. We

addressed these problems cooperatively with SAE Hybrid III Dummy Family

Task Group. These efforts produced a substantially modified dummy. Some

changes were made as late as September 1998.

The dummy's initial configuration and biomechanical response

corridors were based on anthropometry and mass distribution of 3-year-

old children and on scaling techniques from the 50th percentile male

Hybrid III dummy. The scaling reflects differences in geometry and

dimensional characteristics of particular body segments and their

elastic properties. The dummy's biofidelity response corridors cover

head impact response in drop tests and neck flexion in pendulum tests.

Since we could not determine the stiffness of the ribcage and

abdomen based on existing biofidelity data, we asked a medical advisory

group at the Children's National Medical Center in Washington, D.C. to

evaluate the dummy based on its expertise with children of that age

group. Changes were made to the stiffness of the dummy's ribcage as a

result of the physicians' evaluation and recommendation. The stiffness

of the dummy's abdomen was deemed to appropriately mimic that of an

actual child.

While the CRABI Task Force had recommended that the dummy be tested

while dressed in a diaper and standard clothing during tests, we have

not conducted any tests with a diapered dummy. We have decided against

using diapers because we believe diapers would prevent the dummy from

producing repeatable results.

Based on our evaluation of the latest version of the CRABI 12-

month-old infant crash test dummy through a new, rigorous test program,

we have tentatively concluded that the dummy is ready for incorporation

into Part 572. As a result of our evaluation and the dummy's intended

use in forward and rear facing child restraints, we are proposing

calibration specifications for the head and neck both in frontal and

rear impacts. We are also proposing calibration specifications for a

frontal impact test that measures thorax responses and a torso flexion

stiffness test. We are placing in the docket a technical report

entitled ``Development and Evaluation of the CRABI 12-Month-Old Infant

Crash Test Dummy (January, 1999 version).'' That report provides the

technical information supporting this rulemaking.

The proposed specifications and performance criteria for the CRABI

12-month-old infant crash test dummy would consist of two items:

(1) A drawings and specifications package entitled ``Parts List and

Drawings and for the 12-Month-Old Infant (CRABI) Dummy (January

1999)''; and

(2) A user's manual entitled ``User's Manual for the CRABI 12-

Month-Old Infant Dummy [a date would be inserted in the final rule].''

In order to facilitate comment on the general content and format of

the user's manual, we have placed in the docket a copy of a manual

entitled ``User's Guide for the Twelve and Eighteen Month Old Infant

Dummies (CRABI)'', SAE Engineering Aid 27 (June 1995).

The specifications are intended to ensure that the dummies are

uniform in their construction and capable of repeatable and

reproducible response in the impact environment. We note that the first

item listed above, the parts list

[[Page 10966]]

and drawings, is available for inspection in our technical reference

library. (Since this item is non-scannable, we cannot place it in the

DOT Dockets Management System (DMS). Instead, we have placed in the

docket a statement indicating where this item may be viewed, i.e., in

NHTSA's technical reference library. You may also obtain copies from

Reprographic Technologies, 9000 Virginia Manor Road, Beltsville, MD

20705; Telephone: (301) 419-5070.

As we have done for other dummies, we are proposing impact

performance criteria to serve as calibration checks, and to further

assure the kinematic uniformity of the dummy and the absence of

structural damage and functional deficiency from previous use. The

tests address head, neck, and thorax impact responses and resistance to

flexion motion assessments of the lumbar spine-abdomen area when the

upper torso half is flexed relative to the lower half.

We are proposing generic specifications for all of the dummy-based

sensors. For most earlier dummies, we specified sensors by make and

model. However, we believe that approach is unnecessarily restrictive

and limits innovation and competition.

The proposed sensor specifications are essentially generic and

reflect performance characteristics of the sensors used in our dummy

evaluation series that are identified by make and model in the above

referenced technical report ``Development and Evaluation of the CRABI

12-month-old Infant Dummy.'' Specifications for the proposed sensors

are included in the drawing package. You are encouraged to comment on

the adequacy of the proposed specifications; the potential impact on

the quality of measurements to be acquired, including the comparability

of data using sensors manufactured by different companies; and issues

related to calibration assurance tests.

We note that the CRABI 12-month-old infant dummy is the fourth of

several new dummies we are proposing to add to Part 572. We have

already proposed adding a new, advanced 6-year-old dummy (H-III6C) (63

FR 35170), a fifth percentile small adult female dummy (H-III5F) (63 FR

46981), and an advanced 3-year-old dummy (H-III3C) (64 FR 4385). We

intend to use these dummies in connection with our rulemaking for

advanced air bags (NRPM at 63 FR 49958). As part of that rulemaking, we

could specify all of these dummies for use in a variety of potential

Standard No. 208 tests, including static out-of-position tests and/or

various dynamic tests. In a separate rulemaking, we could consider

specifying these child dummies for use in Standard No. 213 tests.

We emphasize, however, that this notice only concerns the CRABI 12-

month-old dummy, and that we are only proposing to add the dummy to

Part 572. However, since one of the primary purposes of adding the

dummy to Part 572 is to enable it to be specified for use in the

Federal motor vehicle safety standards, we encourage you to address its

suitability for tests related to occupant crash protection, e.g., those

discussed or proposed in the NPRM on advanced air bags. We also

encourage you to address the dummy's suitability with respect to

measuring proposed and other injury criteria,1 as well as

the choice of and potential impact of traditional clothing on the dummy

and its calibration measurements.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\1\ For information concerning potential injury criteria, see

Development of Improved Injury Criteria for the Assessment of

Advanced Automotive Restraint Systems, June, 1998, Docket No.

NHTSA98-4405-9. (Available on the NHTSA website at http://

www.nhtsa.dot.gov.)

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Regulatory Analyses and Notices

Executive Order 12866 and DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures

Executive Order 12866, ``Regulatory Planning and Review'' (58 FR

51735, October 4, 1993), provides for making determinations whether a

regulatory action is ``significant'' and therefore subject to Office of

Management and Budget (OMB) review and to the requirements of the

Executive Order. The Order defines a ``significant regulatory action''

as one that is likely to result in a rule that may:

(1) Have an annual effect on the economy of $100 million or more or

adversely affect in a material way the economy, a sector of the

economy, productivity, competition, jobs, the environment, public

health or safety, or State, local, or Tribal governments or

communities;

(2) Create a serious inconsistency or otherwise interfere with an

action taken or planned by another agency;

(3) Materially alter the budgetary impact of entitlements, grants,

user fees, or loan programs or the rights and obligations of recipients

thereof; or

(4) Raise novel legal or policy issues arising out of legal

mandates, the President's priorities, or the principles set forth in

the Executive Order.

We have considered the impact of this rulemaking action under

Executive Order 12866 and the Department of Transportation's regulatory

policies and procedures. This rule is not considered a significant

regulatory action under section 3(f) of the Executive Order 12866.

Consequently, it was not reviewed by the Office of Management and

Budget. This rulemaking document was not reviewed by the Office of

Management and Budget under E.O. 12866, ``Regulatory Planning and

Review.'' The rulemaking action is also not considered to be

significant under the Department's Regulatory Policies and Procedures

(44 FR 11034; February 26, 1979).

This document proposes to amend 49 CFR Part 572 by adding design

and performance specifications for a new 12-month-old child dummy which

the agency may later separately propose for use in the Federal motor

vehicle safety standards. If this proposed rule becomes final, it would

impose requirement on only those businesses which choose to manufacture

or test with the dummy. It may indirectly affect vehicle and child seat

manufacturers if it is incorporated by reference into the advanced air

bag rulemaking or a future Child Seating Systems (FMVSS No. 213)

rulemaking.

The cost of an uninstrumented CRABI dummy is approximately $17,000.

Instrumentation would add approximately $14,000 to $45,000 to the cost,

depending on the amount of data channels the user chooses to collect.

Because the economic impacts of this proposal are so minimal, no

further regulatory evaluation is necessary.

Executive Order 12612

We have analyzed this proposal in accordance with Executive Order

12612 (``Federalism''). We have determined that this proposal does not

have sufficient Federalism impacts to warrant the preparation of a

federalism assessment.

Executive Order 13045

Executive Order 13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997) applies to any

rule that: (1) is determined to be ``economically significant'' as

defined under E.O. 12866, and (2) concerns an environmental, health or

safety risk that NHTSA has reason to believe may have a

disproportionate effect on children. If the regulatory action meets

both criteria, we must evaluate the environmental health or safety

effects of the planned rule on children, and explain why the planned

regulation is preferable to other potentially effective and reasonably

feasible alternatives considered by us.

This rule is not subject to the Executive Order because it is not

economically significant as defined in E.O. 12866. It does indirectly

involve decisions based on health risks that disproportionately affect

children, namely, the risk of deploying air bags to

[[Page 10967]]

infants. However, this rulemaking serves to reduce, rather than

increase, that risk.

Executive Order 12778

Pursuant to Executive Order 12778, ``Civil Justice Reform,'' we

have considered whether this proposed rule would have any retroactive

effect. We conclude that it would not have such effect. Under 49 U.S.C.

30103, whenever a Federal motor vehicle safety standard is in effect, a

State may not adopt or maintain a safety standard applicable to the

same aspect of performance which is not identical to the Federal

standard, except to the extent that the state requirement imposes a

higher level of performance and applies only to vehicles procured for

the State's use. 49 U.S.C. 30161 sets forth a procedure for judicial

review of final rules establishing, amending or revoking Federal motor

vehicle safety standards. That section does not require submission of a

petition for reconsideration or other administrative proceedings before

parties may file suit in court.

Regulatory Flexibility Act

Pursuant to the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.,

as amended by the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act

(SBREFA) of 1996) whenever an agency is required to publish a notice of

rulemaking for any proposed or final rule, it must prepare and make

available for public comment a regulatory flexibility analysis that

describes the effect of the rule on small entities (i.e., small

businesses, small organizations, and small governmental jurisdictions).

However, no regulatory flexibility analysis is required if the head of

an agency certifies the rule will not have a significant economic

impact on a substantial number of small entities. SBREFA amended the

Regulatory Flexibility Act to require Federal agencies to provide a

statement of the factual basis for certifying that a rule will not have

a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small

entities.

The Administrator has considered the effects of this rulemaking

action under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.) and

certifies that this proposal would not have a significant economic

impact on a substantial number of small entities. The proposal would

not impose or rescind any requirements for anyone. The Regulatory

Flexibility Act does not, therefore, require a regulatory flexibility

analysis.

National Environmental Policy Act

We have analyzed this proposed amendment for the purposes of the

National Environmental Policy Act and determined that it would not have

any significant impact on the quality of the human environment.

Paperwork Reduction Act

Under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, a person is not required

to respond to a collection of information by a Federal agency unless

the collection displays a valid OMB control number. This proposal does

not propose any new information collection requirements.

National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act

Section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement

Act of 1995 (NTTAA), Public Law 104-113, section 12(d) (15 U.S.C. 272)

directs us to use voluntary consensus standards in its regulatory

activities unless doing so would be inconsistent with applicable law or

otherwise impractical. Voluntary consensus standards are technical

standards (e.g., materials specifications, test methods, sampling

procedures, and business practices) that are developed or adopted by

voluntary consensus standards bodies, such as the Society of Automotive

Engineers (SAE). The NTTAA directs us to provide Congress, through OMB,

explanations when we decide not to use available and applicable

voluntary consensus standards.

The CRABI twelve-month-old dummy that is the subject of this

document was developed under the auspices of the SAE. All relevant SAE

standards were reviewed as part of the development process. The

following voluntary consensus standards have been used in developing

the dummy:

SAE Recommended Practice J211, Rev. Mar95

``Instrumentation for Impact Tests'';

SAE J1733 of 1994-12 ``Sign Convention for Vehicle Crash

Testing''.

Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

Section 202 of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA)

requires Federal agencies to prepare a written assessment of the costs,

benefits and other effects of proposed or final rules that include a

Federal mandate likely to result in the expenditure by State, local or

tribal governments, in the aggregate, or by the private sector, of more

than $100 million in any one year (adjusted for inflation with base

year of 1995). Before promulgating a NHTSA rule for which a written

statement is needed, section 205 of the UMRA generally requires us to

identify and consider a reasonable number of regulatory alternatives

and adopt the least costly, most cost-effective or least burdensome

alternative that achieves the objectives of the rule. The provisions of

section 205 do not apply when they are inconsistent with applicable

law. Moreover, section 205 allows us to adopt an alternative other than

the least costly, most cost-effective or least burdensome alternative

if we publish with the final rule an explanation why that alternative

was not adopted.

This proposal does not propose to impose any unfunded mandates

under the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995. This proposal does not

meet the definition of a Federal mandate because it does not impose

requirements on anyone. Further, it would not result in costs of $100

million or more to either State, local, or tribal governments, in the

aggregate, or to the private sector. Thus, this proposal is not subject

to the requirements of sections 202 and 205 of the UMRA.

Regulation Identifier Number (RIN)

The Department of Transportation assigns a regulation identifier

number (RIN) to each regulatory action listed in the Unified Agenda of

Federal Regulations. The Regulatory Information Service Center

publishes the Unified Agenda in April and October of each year. You may

use the RIN contained in the heading at the beginning of this document

to find this action in the Unified Agenda.

Comments

How do I prepare and submit comments?

Your comments must be written and in English. To ensure that your

comments are correctly filed in the Docket, please include the docket

number of this document in your comments.

Your comments must not be more than 15 pages long. (49 CFR 553.21).

We established this limit to encourage you to write your primary

comments in a concise fashion. However, you may attach necessary

additional documents to your comments. There is no limit on the length

of the attachments.

Please submit two copies of your comments, including the

attachments, to Docket Management at the address given above under

ADDRESSES.

How can I be sure that my comments were received?

If you wish Docket Management to notify you upon its receipt of

your comments, enclose a self-addressed,

[[Page 10968]]

stamped postcard in the envelope containing your comments. Upon

receiving your comments, Docket Management will return the postcard by

mail.

How do I submit confidential business information?

If you wish to submit any information under a claim of

confidentiality, you should submit three copies of your complete

submission, including the information you claim to be confidential

business information, to the Chief Counsel, NHTSA, at the address given

above under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT. In addition, you should

submit two copies, from which you have deleted the claimed confidential

business information, to Docket Management at the address given above

under ADDRESSES. When you send a comment containing information claimed

to be confidential business information, you should include a cover

letter setting forth the information specified in our confidential

business information regulation. (49 CFR Part 512.)

Will the agency consider late comments?

We will consider all comments that Docket Management receives

before the close of business on the comment closing date indicated

above under DATES. To the extent possible, we will also consider

comments that Docket Management receives after that date. If Docket

Management receives a comment too late for us to consider it in

developing a final rule (assuming that one is issued), we will consider

that comment as an informal suggestion for future rulemaking action.

How can I read the comments submitted by other people?

You may read the comments received by Docket Management at the

address given above under ADDRESSES. The hours of the Docket are

indicated above in the same location.

You may also see the comments on the Internet. To read the comments

on the Internet, take the following steps:

1. Go to the Docket Management System (DMS) Web page of the

Department of Transportation (http://dms.dot.gov/).

2. On that page, click on ``search.''

3. On the next page (http://dms.dot.gov/search/), type in the four-

digit docket number shown at the beginning of this document. Example:

If the docket number were ``NHTSA-1998-1234,'' you would type ``1234.''

After typing the docket number, click on ``search.''

4. On the next page, which contains docket summary information for

the docket you selected, click on the desired comments. You may

download the comments. However, since the comments are imaged

documents, instead of word processing documents, the downloaded

comments are not word searchable.

Please note that even after the comment closing date, we will

continue to file relevant information in the Docket as it becomes

available. Further, some people may submit late comments. Accordingly,

we recommend that you periodically check the Docket for new material.

List of Subjects in 49 CFR Part 572

Motor vehicle safety.

In consideration of the foregoing, NHTSA proposes to amend 49 CFR

Part 572 as follows:

PART 572--ANTHROPOMORPHIC TEST DUMMIES

1. The authority citation for Part 572 would continue to read as

follows:

Authority: 49 U.S.C. 332, 30111, 30115, 30117; and 30166

delegation of authority at 49 CFR 1.50.

2. 49 CFR Part 572 would be amended by adding a new Subpart R

consisting of 572.150-572.156 to read as follows:

Subpart R--CRABI 12-Month-Old-Infant Crash Test Dummy

Sec.

572.150 Incorporation by reference.

572.151 General description.

572.152 Head assembly and test procedure.

572.153 Neck-headform assembly and test procedure.

572.154 Thorax assembly and test procedure.

572.155 Torso assembly and torso flexion test procedure.

572.156 Test condition and instrumentation.

Subpart R--CRABI 12-Month-Old-Infant Crash Test Dummy

Sec. 572.150 Incorporation by reference.

(a) The following materials are hereby incorporated in this subpart

R by reference.

(1) A drawings and specifications package entitled ``Parts List and

Drawings for the CRABI 12-Month-Old-Infant Crash Test Dummy (January

1999)'';

(2) A user's manual entitled ``User's Manual for the CRABI 12-

Month-Old-Infant Crash Test Dummy [a date will be inserted in the final

rule]'';

(3) SAE Recommended Practice J211, Rev. Mar95 ``Instrumentation for

Impact Tests''

(4) SAE J1733 of 1994-12 ``Sign Convention for Vehicle Crash

Testing''.

(b) The Director of the Federal Register approved those materials

incorporated by reference in accordance with 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR

part 51. Copies of the materials may be inspected at NHTSA's Docket

Section, 400 Seventh Street S.W., room 5109, Washington, DC, or at the

Office of the Federal Register, 800 North Capitol Street, NW, Suite

700, Washington, DC.

(c) The incorporated materials are available as follows:

(1) The drawings and specifications package referred to in

paragraph (a)(1) of this section and the user's manual referred to in

paragraph (a)(2) of this section are available from Reprographic

Technologies, 9000 Virginia Manor Road, Beltsville, MD 20705 (301) 419-

5070.

(2) The SAE materials referred to paragraphs (a)(3) and (a)(4) of

this section are available from the Society of Automotive Engineers,

Inc., 400 Commonwealth Drive, Warrendale, PA 15096.

Sec. 572.151 General description.

(a) The representative 12 Month-Old-Infant crash test dummy is

described by the following materials:

(1) Technical drawings and specifications package 921022-000, the

titles of which are listed in Table A;

(2) Operation and Maintenance Manual (to be incorporated at

issuance of final rule);

(b) The dummy is made up of the component assemblies set out in the

following Table A:

Table A

------------------------------------------------------------------------

Component assembly Drawing number

------------------------------------------------------------------------

Head Assembly.......................... 921022-001

Neck Assembly (complete)............... 921022-041

Upper/Lower Torso Assembly............. 921022-060

Leg Assembly........................... 921022-055 R&L

Arm Assembly........................... 921022-054 R&L

------------------------------------------------------------------------

(c) Adjacent segments of the dummy are joined in a manner such

that, except for contacts existing under static conditions, there is no

contact between metallic elements throughout the range of motion or

under simulated crash impact conditions.

(d) The structural properties of the dummy are such that the dummy

conforms to this part in every respect before its use in any test

similar to those specified in Standard Nos. 208, Occupant Crash

Protection, and 213, Child Restraint Systems.

Sec. 572.152 Head assembly and test procedure.

(a) The head assembly for this test consists of the assembly

(drawing

[[Page 10969]]

921022-001), triaxial mount block (SA572-80), and 3 accelerometers

(drawing SA572-S4).

(b) Frontal and rear impact.

(1) Frontal impact. When the head assembly in paragraph (a) of this

section is dropped from a height of 376.0+/-1.0 mm (14.8+/-0.04 in) in

accordance with paragraph (c)(3)(i) of this section, the peak resultant

acceleration at the location of the accelerometers at the head CG shall

not be less than 100 g or more than 120 g. The resultant acceleration

vs. time history curve shall be unimodal, and the oscillations

occurring after the main pulse shall be less than 10 percent of the

peak resultant acceleration. The lateral acceleration shall not exceed

+/-15 g's.

(2) Rear impact. When the head assembly in paragraph (a) of this

section is dropped from a height of 376.0+/-1.0 mm (14.8+/-0.04 in) in

accordance with paragraph (c)(3)(ii) of this section, the peak

resultant acceleration at the location of the accelerometers at the

head CG shall not be less than 55 g and more than 71 g. The resultant

acceleration vs. time history curve shall be unimodal, and the

oscillations occurring after the main pulse shall be less than 10

percent of the peak resultant acceleration. The lateral acceleration

shall not exceed +/-15 g's.

(c) Head test procedure. The test procedure for the head is as

follows:

(1) Soak the head assembly in a controlled environment at any

temperature between 18.9 and 25.6 deg.C (66 and 78 deg.F) and at any

relative humidity between 10 and 70 percent for at least four hours

prior to a test. These temperature and humidity levels shall be

maintained throughout the entire testing period specified in this

section.

(2) Prior to the test, clean the impact surface of the head skin

and the steel impact plate surface with isopropyl alcohol,

trichlorethane, or an equivalent. Both impact surfaces must be clean

and dry for testing.

(3)(i) Suspend the head assembly with its midsagittal plane in

vertical orientation as shown in Figure R1. The lowest point on the

forehead is 376.0+/-1.0 mm (14.8+/-0.04 in) from the steel impact

surface. The 1.57 mm (0.062 in) diameter holes located on either side

of the dummy's head in transverse alignment with the CG, are used to

ensure that the head transverse plane is level with respect to the

impact surface. The angle between the lower surface plane of the neck

transducer mass simulator (drawing 910420-003) and the plane of the

impact surface is 45+/-1 degrees.

(ii) Suspend the head assembly with its midsagittal plane in

vertical orientation as shown in Figure R2. The lowest point on the

back of the head is 376.0+/-1.0 mm (14.8+/-0.04 in) from the steel

impact surface. The 1.57 mm (0.062 in) diameter holes located on either

side of the dummy's head in transverse alignment with the CG are used

to ensure that the head transverse plane is level with respect to the

impact surface. The angle between the lower surface plane of the neck

transducer mass simulator (drawing 910420-003) and the impact surface

is 90+/-1 degrees.

(4) Drop the head assembly from the specified height by a means

that ensures a smooth, instant release onto a rigidly supported flat

horizontal steel plate which is 51 mm (2 in) thick and 610 mm (24 in)

square. The impact surface shall have a finish of not less than 0.2

microns (8 micro inches) (RMS) and not more than 2 microns (80 micro

inches) (RMS).

(5) Allow at least 2 hours between successive tests on the same

head.

Sec. 572.153 Neck-headform assembly and test procedure.

(a) The neck and headform assembly for the purposes of this test

consists of the neck assembly (drawing 921022-041), adapter assembly

(drawing TE3200-160), force-moment transducer (drawing SA572-S23), and

headform assembly (drawing TE3200-140).

(b) When the neck and headform assembly, as defined in

Sec. 572.153(a), is tested according to the test procedure in

Sec. 572.153(c), it shall have the following characteristics:

(1) Flexion.

(i) Plane D referenced in Figure R3 shall rotate in the direction

of pre-impact flight with respect to the pendulum's longitudinal

centerline not less than 75 degrees and not more than 89 degrees

between 42 milliseconds (ms) and 56 ms after time zero.

(ii) The peak moment measured by the neck transducer (drawing

SA572-S23) about the occipital condyles shall have a value not less

than 37 Nm (27.3 ft-lb) and not more than 45 Nm (33.2 ft-lb) within the

minimum and maximum rotation interval. The positive moment shall decay

for the first time to 5 Nm (3.7 ft-lb) between 60 ms and 80 ms.

(2) Extension.

(i) Plane D referenced in Figure R4 shall rotate in the direction

of preimpact flight with respect to the pendulum's longitudinal

centerline not less than 78 degrees and not more than 90 degrees

between 58 ms and 66 ms after time zero.

(ii) The peak negative moment measured by the neck transducer

(drawing SA572-S23) about the occipital condyles shall have a value not

more than -11 Nm (-8.1 ft-lb) and not less than -23 Nm (-17.0 ft-lb)

within the minimum and maximum rotation interval. The negative moment

shall decay for the first time to -5 Nm (-3.7 ft-lb) between 78 ms and

90 ms after time zero.

(3) Time-zero is defined as the time of initial contact between the

pendulum striker plate and the honeycomb material.

(c) Test Procedure.

(1) Soak the neck assembly in a controlled environment at any

temperature between 20.6 and 22.2 deg.C (69 and 72 deg.F) and at any

relative humidity between 10 and 70 percent for at least four hours

prior to a test. These temperature and humidity levels shall be

maintained throughout the entire testing period specified in this

section.

(2) Torque the jam nut (drawing 9001336) on the neck cable (drawing

ATD-6206) to 0.2 to 0.3 Nm (1.9-2.4 in-lb).

(3) Mount the neck-headform assembly, defined in paragraph (b) of

this section, on the pendulum so the midsagittal plane of the headform

is vertical and coincides with the plane of motion of the pendulum as

shown in Figure R3 for flexion and Figure R4 for extension tests.

(i) The moment and rotation data channels are defined to be zero

when the longitudinal centerline of the neck and pendulum are parallel.

(ii) The test shall be conducted without inducing any torsion type

twisting of the neck.

(4) Release the pendulum and allow it to fall freely to achieve an

impact velocity of 5.2+/-0.1 m/s (17.1+/-0.4 ft/s) for flexion and

2.5+/-0.1 m/s (8.2+/-0.4 ft/s) for extension measured at the center of

the pendulum accelerometer at the instant of contact with the

honeycomb.

(i) Time-zero is defined as the time of initial contact between the

pendulum striker plate and the honeycomb material. The pendulum data

channel should be at the zero level at this time.

(ii) Stop the pendulum from the initial velocity with an

acceleration vs. time pulse which meets the velocity change as

specified below. Integrate the pendulum acceleration data channel to

obtain the velocity vs. time curve as indicated in Table B:

[[Page 10970]]

Table B.--Pendulum Pulse

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Flexion Extension

Time ms -------------------------------- Time ms -------------------------------

m/s ft/s m/s ft/s

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

10............................................. 1.6-2.3 5.2-7.5 6...................................... 0.8-1.2 2.6-3.9

20............................................. 3.4-4.2 11.2-13.8 10..................................... 1.5-2.1 4.9-6.9

25............................................. 4.3-5.2 14.1-17.1 14..................................... 2.2-2.9 7.2-9.5

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Sec. 572.154 Thorax assembly and test procedure.

(a) Thorax Assembly. The thorax consists of the part of the torso

assembly shown in drawing 921022-060.

(b) When the thorax of a completely assembled dummy (drawing

921022-000) is impacted by a test probe conforming to Sec. 572.156(a)

at 5.0+/-0.1m/s (16.5+/-0.3 ft/s) according to the test procedure in

paragraph (c) of this section, the peak force, measured by the impact

probe in accordance with paragraph Sec. 572.156(a), shall be not less

than 1600 N (360 lb) and not more than 1700 N (382 lb).

(c) Test procedure.

(1) Soak the dummy in a controlled environment at any temperature

between 20.6 and 22.2 deg.C (69 and 72 F) and at any relative humidity

between 10 and 70 percent for at least four hours prior to a test.

These temperature and humidity levels shall be maintained throughout

the entire testing period specified in this section.

(2) Dress the dummy in light-weight cotton stretch short-sleeve

shirt and above-the-knee pants.

(3) Seat and orient the dummy on a level seating surface without

back support as shown in Figure R5, with the lower limbs extended

forward, parallel to the midsagittal, plane and the arms slightly

forward of vertical with fingers barely touching the seating surface

plane. The dummy's midsagittal plane is vertical within +/-1 degree and

the posterior surface of the upper spine box is aligned at 90+/-1

degrees from the horizontal. (Shim material may be used under the upper

legs to maintain the dummy's specified spine box surface alignment).

(4) Establish the impact point at the chest midsagittal plane so

that the impact point of the longitudinal centerline of the probe

coincides with the dummy's mid-sagittal plane and is centered on the

torso 196+/-2.5 mm (7.7+/-0.1 in) vertically from the plane of the

seating surface and is within 0.5 degrees of a horizontal plane.

(5) Impact the thorax with the test probe so that at the moment of

contact the probe's longitudinal center line falls within 2 degrees of

a horizontal line in the dummy's midsagittal plane.

(6) Guide the test probe during impact so that there is no

significant lateral, vertical or rotational movement.

(7) Allow at least 30 minutes between successive tests.

Sec. 572.155 Torso assembly and torso flexion test procedure.

(a) Torso assembly. The torso assembly consists of the upper and

lower halves as shown in drawing 921022-060. The test objective is to

determine the flexion stiffness of lumbar spine and abdomen of a fully

assembled dummy to flexion articulation between upper and lower halves

of the torso assembly.

(b) When the upper half of the torso assembly of a seated dummy is

subjected to a force continuously applied at the occipital condyle

level through a rigidly attached adaptor bracket as shown in Figure R6

according to the test procedure set out in paragraph (c) of this

section, the lumbar spine-abdomen assembly shall:

(1) Flex by an amount that permits the thorax spine box (drawing

921022-031) to rotate in midsagittal plane with respect to the rigidly

affixed pelvic structure weldment (drawing 921022-035) from the initial

spine box position to 45 degrees from the vertical, at which time the

force level is not less than 90 N (20 lb) and not more than 120 N (27

lb), and

(2) Upon removal of the force, the upper torso assembly returns to

within 10 degrees of its initial position.

(c) Test procedure. The procedure for the upper/lower torso flexion

stiffness test is as follows:

(1) Soak the dummy in a controlled environment at any temperature

between 20.6 deg. and 22.2 deg.C (69 and 72 F) and at any relative

humidity between 10 and 70 percent for at least 4 hours prior to a

test. These temperature and humidity levels shall be maintained

throughout the entire testing period specified in this section.

(2) Assemble the complete dummy and attach to the fixture in a

seated posture as shown in Figure R6.

(i) Secure the pelvis to the fixture at the lumbar load transducer

or its structural replacement with a rigid bracket as shown in Figure

R6.

(ii) Tighten the mountings so that the pelvis-lumbar joining

surface is horizontal within 1 deg.

(3) Install a low weight rigid loading adapter bracket (not to

exceed 0.50 kg (1.1 lb)) to the posterior of the thoracic spine at the

rear surface of the upper instrumentation cavity box as shown in Figure

R6. The loading bracket is designed such that the point of load

application coincides with the longitudinal axis of the occipital

condyle and also provides means for measuring the rotation of the upper

torso.

(4) Flex the elbow joints to 90 degrees and point the lower arms

forward.

(5) Inspect and adjust, if necessary, the positioning of the

abdominal insert within the pelvis cavity and with respect to the torso

flesh to assure uniform fit and clearances.

(6) Attach means of loading the dummy through the point of load

application as shown in Figure R6.

(7) The initial orientation of the angle reference plane of the

seated, unsupported dummy shall not exceed 20 degrees of flexion as

shown in Figure R6. The angle reference plane is defined by the

transverse plane the rear surface of the upper thoracic instrumentation

cavity box makes with respect to the vertical as shown in Figure R6.

(8) Apply a forward force in the midsagittal plane through the

adaptor bracket as shown in Figure R6 at any upper torso deflection

rate between 0.5 and 1.5 degrees per second, until the angle reference

plane reaches 45 degrees of flexion with the applied force at 58.0 to

62.0 degrees from horizontal.

(9) Continue to apply a force sufficient to maintain 45 degrees of

flexion for 10 seconds, and record the highest applied force during the

10 second period.

(10) Release all force as rapidly as possible, and measure the

return angle with respect to the initial angle reference plane as

defined in paragraph (c)(7) of this section 3 minutes after the

release.

Sec. 572.156 Test conditions and instrumentation.

(a) The test probe used for thoracic impact tests is a 100.6 mm (4

in) diameter cylinder that weighs 2.86+/

[[Page 10971]]

-0.02 kg (6.3+/-0.04 lb), including instrumentation. Its impacting end

has a flat right angle face that is rigid and has an edge radius of

12.7 mm (0.5 in). The test probe has an accelerometer mounted on the

end opposite from impact with its sensitive axis co-linear to the

longitudinal centerline of the cylinder.

(b) Head accelerometers have the dimensions, response

characteristics, and sensitive mass locations specified in drawing

SA572-S4 and are mounted in the head as shown in drawing 921022-000.

(c) The neck force-moment transducer has the dimensions, response

characteristics, and sensitive axis locations specified in drawing SA

572-S23 and is mounted for testing as shown in figures R3 and R4.

(d) The shoulder force transducers have the dimensions and response

characteristics specified in drawing SA572-S25 and are allowed to be

mounted as an option in the torso assembly as shown in drawing 921022-

000.

(e) The thorax accelerometers have the dimensions, response

characteristics, and sensitive mass locations specified in drawing

SA572-S4 and are mounted in the torso assembly in triaxial

configuration as shown in drawing 921022-000.

(f) The lumbar spine force/moment transducer has the dimensions and

response characteristics specified in drawing SA572-S23 and is mounted

in the torso assembly as shown in drawing 921022-000.

(g) The pelvis accelerometers have the dimensions, response

characteristics, and sensitive mass locations specified in drawing

SA572-S4 and are mounted within the pelvis in triaxial configuration as

shown in drawing 921022-000.

(h) The pubic force transducers have the dimensions and response

characteristics specified in drawing SA572-S24 and are mounted in the

torso assembly as shown in drawing 921022-000.

(i) The outputs of acceleration and force-sensing devices installed

in the dummy and in the test apparatus specified by this part are

recorded in individual data channels that conform to the requirements

of SAE Recommended Practice J211, Rev. Mar95 ``Instrumentation for

Impact Test,'' with channel classes as follows:

(1) Head and headform acceleration--Class 1000

(2) Neck :

(i) Forces--Class 1000

(ii) Moments--Class 600

(iii) Pendulum acceleration--Class 180

(3) Thorax:

(i) Spine and pendulum accelerations--Class 180

(ii) Shoulder forces--Class 600

(4) Lumbar:

(i) Forces--Class 1000

(ii) Moments--Class 600

(iii) Pendulum acceleration--Class 180

(5) Pelvis:

(i) Accelerations and forces--Class 1000

(ii) Moments--Class 600.

(j) Coordinate signs for instrumentation polarity conform to the

Sign Convention For Vehicle Crash Testing, Surface Vehicle Information

Report, SAE J1733, 1994-12.

(k) The mountings for sensing devices shall have no resonance

frequency within range of 3 times the frequency range of the applicable

channel class.

(l) Limb joints shall be set at 1 g, barely restraining the weight

of the limb when it is extended horizontally. The force required to

move a limb segment shall not exceed 2 g throughout the range of limb

motion.

(m) Performance tests of the same component, segment, assembly, or

fully assembled dummy shall be separated in time by period of not less

than 30 minutes unless otherwise noted.

(n) Surfaces of dummy components are not painted except as

specified in this part or in drawings subtended by this part.

BILLING CODE

[[Page 10972]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP08MR99.024

[[Page 10973]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP08MR99.025

[[Page 10974]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP08MR99.026

[[Page 10975]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP08MR99.027

[[Page 10976]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP08MR99.028

[[Page 10977]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP08MR99.029

Issued March 2, 1999.

L. Robert Shelton,

Associate Administrator for Safety Performance Standards.

[FR Doc. 99-5509 Filed 3-5-99; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910-59-C