New Code for Reference Pulse

[derpmann]

as discussed in the last TaskForce meeting I post this topic for Radek Codr:

In the EuroNCAP Testprocedure „SLED TEST PROCEDURE FOR ASSESSING KNEE IMPACT AREAS” 4 pulses are described.
This is similar to the dynamic Whiplash protocol with 3 default pulses. Reference pulses are also described for ECE, IIHS, FMVSS214, …

The proposal is to use PULS as new main location. So the channels should looks like:

• S0PULS000001ACX?
• S0PULS000002ACX?
• S0PULS000003ACX?
• S0PULS000004ACX?

Best regards

[DiVe]

Dear Peter,

I guess this is a handy addition for many customer requests I have seen for sled testing.
Often the pulse reference is taken from "external" tests, but your approach will help to keep
test signals and the requirement pulse together.

My concern is, if the "Main Location Code"/word PULS = pulse will be self explaining.
In principle we assign a signal from elsewhere to the current test object.
May it will be better to have it marked as Reference Pulse?

Pulse alone could also be understood as the current pulse from the test.
May PREQ = “Pulse requirement” could be an alternative?
Or REQU = “Requirement”?
These variants are more general.

Also some customers do process their references before generating a pulse reference signal.
So the data source should be: calculation
in this case?
As always, pure filtering is not referenced as "calculation" and is still "transducer".

If we add the codes for EuroNCAP to the Possible Channels Table, I would propose to have
it defined not so strict?:

• S0PULS????01ACX?

• S0PULS????02ACX?

• S0PULS????03ACX?

• S0PULS????04ACX?

In the mentioned EuroNCAP protocol I found:

2020-02-11 12_46_43-Window.png (72.79 KiB) Viewed 5210 times

So there might be also a generic pulse used for the test.
Also the pulses are referenced by A,B,C,D:

• S0PULS????0AACX?

• S0PULS????0BACX?

• S0PULS????0CACX?

• S0PULS????0DACX?

Is an option, but will require new FL3 codes and is may difficult to read.

I don't want to make it to difficult for the practical use, but this are my thoughts for the implementation.

Kind regards,
Dirk

[pfeiffge]

Dear colleagues, in the meeting of today, we discussed two options for a new main location:
for an easy reading PULS as a main location and RQ for "required" pulse = S0PULSRQ????AC??
or only the main location PREQ Pulse requirement with then more free fine locations = S0PREQ??????AC??

For evaluation it will be a good option to call the required pulse always in the same way, if necessary, different pulses can be named more specific with using the fine locations.

We are looking forward to have more or better ideas, thanks.
Gerd

[derpmann]

Decision of the TaskForce:
MainLocation: PULS
FineLocation1: RQ

[Admin]

Closed during online meeting 2020-09-16