Project: Side Impact: Barrier Design & Evaluation

Reference: S095A/VF

Last update: 27/08/2003 14:34:31

Objectives

The project objectives are to:

* develop the Cellbond aluminium honeycomb barrier to the stage where it:
1) meets the performance specification in the draft Directive;
2) produces repeatable, reproducible side impacts; and
3) can be completely defined by a design specification which also incorporates quality certification;
* develop a test procedure, within the framework of EEVC WG13 to evaluate deformable side impact barrier faces;
* evaluate the alternative side impact barrier faces to the procedure developed under Section 3.2 and determine which barrier face most closely represents a bullet vehicle; and
* produce a proposal with the other EEVC WG13 research partners for an improved performance and/or design specification for the Regulation 95 side impact barrier and any associated amendments to the side impact test procedure.

Description

ECE Regulation 95 defines a side impact test procedure which should improve passenger car side impact protection. Currently, this Regulation contains a performance specification for the side impact barrier, permitting the use of different designs of deformable barrier face. However, different designs of barrier face conforming to the performance specification can produce very different results in impact tests.

The Department has supported the development of an advanced side impact deformable barrier through a contract with TRL. This project will further develop that barrier such that it complies with the performance specification.

This project will also contribute to the work of EEVC Working Group 13 and the identification of a 'best' side impact barrier design ie: the design which is most representative of real-life side impacts and which produces consistent, reproducible results.

This project will produce a proposal for an improved barrier performance and/or design specification to amend Regulation 95 to improve barrier repeatability and the representivity of the side impact test procedure.

Contractor(s)

TRL Limited
Crowthorne House, Nine Mile Ride, Wokingham, Berkshire, RG40 3GA
+44 (0)1344 773131

Contract details

Cost to the Department: £393,496.00

Actual start date: 03 December 1996

Actual completion date: 30 April 2003

Publication(s)

PR/SE/343/97. Repeatability and Certification Performance of the Cellbond Multi 2000 Side Impact Barrier Face (version 15)
Author: TRL Ltd
Publication date: 31/12/1997
Unpublished
Source: Contact steve.gillingham@dft.gsi.gov.uk
More information: http://www.trl.co.uk/static/dft/pr_se_343_97.pdf

PR/SE/483/98. The Design and Validation of Two Angled Walls for Use in the Evaluation of Side Impact Deformable Barrier Faces
Author: TRL Ltd
Publication date: 31/12/1998
Unpublished
Source: Contact steve.gillingham@dft.gsi.gov.uk
More information: http://www.trl.co.uk/static/dft/pr_se_483_98.pdf

PR/SE/415/01. Side Impact Barrier Development and Evaluation. Final report
Author: TRL Ltd
Publication date: 01/11/2001
Unpublished
Source: Contact steve.gillingham@dft.gsi.gov.uk
More information: http://www.trl.co.uk/static/dft/pr_se_415_01.pdf

Side impact MDB Face Specification Validation
Author: TRL, BASt, TNO, Fiat and UTAC
Publication date: 01/11/2001
Unpublished
ISBN: Unpublished Report
Source: Contact steve.gillingham@dft.gsi.gov.uk

Summary of results

  1. Although none of the Cellbond Multi 2000 v15 barriers tested fully met the prescribed force-deflection corridors for all of the individual blocks and one block in every barrier face did not comply with the energy dissipation requirement, five of the six barrier faces did meet, with good repeatability, the total force-deflection requirement. As the failings were not considered to be important for full-scale testing the Cellbond Multi 2000 v15 barrier was deemed to have demonstrated satisfactory performance and good repeatability and was subsequently selected for use in EuroNCAP.

    Upon completion of the collaborative barrier evaluation programme, the EEVC recommended that for good repeatability and reproducability a design specification should be developed to supplement the performance requirement. From the different barriers tested, the progressive design was selected as the most suitable basis for the design specification and when used in full-scale tests demonstrated good repeatability and reproducability. Progressive designs according to the final specification from four manufacturers demonstrated a significant improvement and a need for small changes to the specification.