Präsentation (Nfz-Gesetzgebung und Unterfahrkollisionen)

Transcription

Gesamtverband der Deutschen Versicherungswirtschaft e.V.
The Influence of Recent Legislation for
Heavy Vehicles on the Risk of
Underrun Collisions
October 19, 2007
VDI Congress „Car Safety 2007“
Axel Malczyk
German Insurance Assoc.
Accident Research
2
Need for Effective Front and Rear
Underrun Protection on Heavy Vehicles
No front underrun
protection (FUP)
regulation until
end of 2003 (Directive
2000/40/EC in effect)
Rear underrun
protection (RUP)
regulation (Directive
70/221/EEC) from
early 70‘s
071019_VDI_FzgSich_Underrun_Mal
3
German National Accident Statistics
Accidents w/ personal injury and involvement of goods vehicles
- Collision w/ another oncoming vehicle -
No. of accidents
1000
in 2003
993
896
800
600
536
400
432
403
319
297
245
200
233
117
16
123
90
108
111
0
Accid. w/ fatally injured
Accid. w/ severly injured
Accid. w/ slightly injured
Vans/Trucks,
standard
bodyw ork,
up to 2000 kg
GVW
Vans/Trucks,
standard
bodyw ork,
2001-3500 kg
GVW
Vans/Trucks,
standard
bodyw ork,
> 12000 kg
GVW
Vehicle Type
Sem i-trailer
tractors
other goods
transp. vehic.
4
German National Accident Statistics
Accidents w/ personal injury and involvement of goods vehicles
- Collision w/ another vehicle moving ahead or waiting -
No. of accidents
2000
in 2003
2108
3410
Includes both
accidents with
goods transp. vehic.
being struck in the
rear and impacting
other vehicles in the
rear
1800
1600
1400
1439
1200
1192
1000
877
800
600
603
400
438
338
320
200
8 75
0
Accid. w/ fatally injured
Accid. w/ severly injured
Accid. w/ slightly injured
39
50
Vans/Trucks, Vans/Trucks,
standard
standard
bodyw ork,
bodyw ork,
up to 2000 kg 2001-3500 kg
GVW
GVW
Vans/Trucks,
standard
bodyw ork,
> 12000 kg
GVW
Vehicle type
136
Sem i-trailer
tractors
65
other goods
transp. vehic.
5
Example of Frontal Collision Without FUP
Truck built before end of 2003:
no FUP present
Source: Brilon
Volunteer F.D.
Truck chassis frame overruns car longitudinals
⇒ Inefficient energy absorption, occupant compartment
intrusion with high injury risk
6
Front Underrun Protection According to Directive 2000/40/EC
Side view
Top view
80 kN
FUP
(before and after
test)
160 kN
80 kN
max.
400 mm after test
max. 400 mm
(max. 450 mm after test)
Static test loads in points, seperately applied:
P1, P3: 80 kN or 50% of permissible mass (GVW)
P2:
.
160 kN or 100% of permissible mass (GVW)
7
EU Research Project VC-Compat
Car-to Truck Group
•
RTD Project in 5th EU Framework
Program
•
Initiated by EEVC WG14
•
Duration: March 2003 – End of 2006
•
13 project partners in
Car-to-Car Group and
Car-to-Truck Group
8
VC-Compat Crash Test
Frontal collision (ca. 70% overlap) of production car at 75 kph into
stationary heavy truck equipped with prototype rigid FUP
Source:
VC-Compat, BASt
9
VC-Compat Crash Test
Source:
VC-Compat, BASt
EuroNCAP rating of driver loading
10
Example of Frontal Collision With FUP
Truck built after end of 2003:
FUP present
Good engagement of both the car‘s and truck‘s structures
⇒ Good energy absorption on car, stable occupant compartment
Source:
Kreispressewart
Friedrich W. Thies
FUP Requirements and Exemptions
FUP fitment is required for:
• N2 vehicles with a GVW > 3.5 t and ≤ 7.5 t
(only FUPS ground clearance ≤ 400 mm required, no strength requirem.)
• N2 vehicles with a GVW > 7.5 t
• N3 vehicles (i.e., with a GVW > 12 t)
FUP fitment is not required for:
• “Vehicles, such that their use is incompatible with the provisions of
front underrun protection”
• N2 and N3 vehicles that qualify as „off-road vehicles“ (N2G and N3G)
acc. to Directive 70/156/EEC
11
12
FUP Fitment Exemptions
N2 vehicles qualify as „off-road“ (N2G) acc. to Directive 70/156/EEC if:
• all wheels can be driven simultaneously
or
• at least half the wheels are driven
and
• at least one differential locking mechanism or similar
and
• can climb 25 % gradient (solo vehicle)
13
FUP Fitment Exemptions
N3 vehicles qualify as „off-road“ (N3G) acc. to Directive 70/156/EEC if:
• all wheels can be driven simultaneously
or
• at least half the wheels are driven
and
• at least one differential locking mechanism or similar
and
• can climb 25 % gradient (solo vehicle)
and
at least four of the following six requirements are satisfied:
• approach, ramp and departure angle ≥ 25°
• ground clearance under front and rear axle ≥ 250 mm
• ground clearance between the axles ≥ 300 mm
14
Example of Frontal Collision Without FUP
Truck built after end of 2003:
no FUP present
Source:
Ingolstadt F.D.
Source:
Kreispressewart
Friedrich W. Theis
Truck obviously exempt from FUP requirement
⇒ occupant compartment destruction at windshield
level up to A-pillar, driver fatally injured
15
Determination of FUP Equipment Rate in Europe
• 2004 truck sales figures collected from 7 major European manufact.
Sales figures
Example
2004
truck
sales
region
trucks ≤ 12 trucks ≤ 12 trucks > 12 trucks > 12
tons GVW tons GVW tons GVW tons GVW
with FUPS w/o. FUPS with FUPS w/o. FUPS
Germany
Volvo
all EU*
* if „all EU“ figures not available, please provide „all Europe“ figures
• 2004 truck registration figures and market share of truck
manufacturers determined for 13 European countries
Example
„Whole“
market
Source:
LastautoOmnibusKatalog 2006
16
Results:
• for category 6 – 15.9 t GVW *
- trucks equipped with FUPS
= 60.7 %
- trucks without FUPS
= 33.4 %
• for category ≥ 16 t GVW
- trucks equipped with FUPS
= 83.6 %
- trucks without FUPS
= 14.1 %
Note:
* segment of trucks 6 – 7.5 t GVW (no FUPS strength requirement) included
no information for remaining 5.9 % and 2.3 %, respectively, due to share of other
manufacturers without available data
17
New registrations for trucks with
7.001 – 7.5 t GVW in 2004
(no FUP strength requirement):
in UK:
12511 trucks*
in Germany: 15082 trucks**
in Austria:
Example of 7.5 t truck w/o FUP
199 trucks (7.0 – 8.0 t GVW)***
⇒ trucks in the 7.0 – 7.5 t GVW represent a large market segment in
some EU countries (typical distribution service truck)
*
source: Department for Transport, UK
**
source: Kraftfahrtbundesamt, Germany
***
source: Bundesanstalt Statistik Oesterreich
Possible Solution for More Widespread Use of FUP
Backset of FUP primarily in the horizontal within the envelope of the
approach angle to maintain off-road capabilites
approach
angle
18
19
Penetration of Truck Fleet With FUP
Time until approx. 50% of truck fleet (of one registration year) taken out of
service determined from German registration statistics
⇒ It takes until 2012 that 50% of 2003 model year (last year without legal
FUP requirement) is replaced by new trucks, complying with 2000/40/EC
Number of deleted vehicles
Deletion of Trucks with First Year of Registration 1996 in Germany
(Trucks with Standard Bodywork)
16000
14000
12000
10000
8000
6000
4000
2000
0
1996
1997
1998
1999 2000
2001
Years
2002
2003
2004
2005
20
Rear-Underrun Protection Real-World Performance
While front underrun protection systems have proven their
effectiveness in accidents rear underrun protection still has
significant deficits
Source: Friedberg
Volunteer F.D.
21
P2 max.
100 kN
P3 max. P2 max. P1 max.
25 kN 100 kN
25 kN
(for applic. of test load)
P1 max.
25 kN
600 mm
RUP Test According to Directive 70/221/EEC
700 - 1000 mm
300 mm
Prüfkräfte in den Prüfpunkten:
Static test loads in points, seperately applied:
P1, P3: 25 kN or 12.5% of permissible mass (GVW)
P2:
100 kN or 50%of permissible mass (GVW).
22
Maximum Test Loads According to Directive 70/221/EEC
• Test load in P1, P3 max. 25 kN or 12.5% of vehicle permissible mass
(GVW), whichever is lower
• Test load in P2 max. 100 kN or 50% of vehicle permissible mass (GVW),
whichever is lower
Test load in P2
100 kN
37.5 kN
7.5 t
20 t
Vehicle GVW
23
RUP Test According to Directive 2006/20/EC
P1 max.
50 kN
P2 max.
100 kN
700 - 1000 mm
P3 max. P2 max. P1 max.
50 kN 100 kN
50 kN
600 mm
• higher test loads
in P1 and P3
(for applic. of test load)
amending Annex II of Directive 70/221/EEC, in effect by March 2007
300 mm
Prüfkräfte in den Prüfpunkten:
• explicit permission of RUP with divided cross member if required by
hydraulic loading platforms
24
RUP Geometry Requirements From Daily Operation
in transport logistics (e.g., Ro/Ro traffic)
rear overhang
in construction logistics
Source: F.X. Meiller
rear departure
angle
Conclusions, Recommendations
Front underrun protection
• Legally required FUP effectively increases crash compatibility
• Exemptions should be reduced:
Include distribution trucks (6.0 – 7.5 tons GVW) and narrow
definition of N2G, N3G “off-road” vehicles
• Adapted requirements imaginable to solve conflict between FUP
geometry and off-road needs (ground clearance, approach angle)
• Passenger cars with multiple load paths show better engagement
of own crash structures in collisions with heavy vehicles
25
Conclusions, Recommendations
Rear underrun protection
• Little benefit expected for opponent protection from new legal
requirement (2006/20/EC)
• Level of test loads and static manner of application does not
reflect real-world accident conditions
• Legal RUP test load and geometry requirements need to be
reviewed and updated
26
Thank you for your attention!
Acknowledgements:
Part of this work was carried out in the course of the project
“VC-Compat” (contract no. GRD2-2001-50083-SI2.346753),
co-financed by the European Commission
Seven European truck and two truck bodywork / trailer
manufacturers and the partners of the VC-Compat Car-to-Truck
group contributed data and expertise
27

Präsentation (Nfz-Gesetzgebung und Unterfahrkollisionen)

Transcription

Similar documents

HESSISCHER FUSSBALL VERBAND Kreisfußballausschuss

Duisburger Lriciarung zum Ü-Fußball verabschiedet Fußball beim

bicycle cable manufacturer