I like to propose a new MME attribute for specifying the impact point of pedestrian impactors (headform, upper legform, legform).
Sorry for submitting this request under the topic "Additional codes", but I didn't find a better one.
Euro NCAP labels the impact points by a grid with the labels
- head zone: <row>,<column> (row: 0 to 18, column: -10 to +10, e.g. "14,+6", "6,0", "12,-4")
- upper leg zone: U,<column> (column: -10 to +10, e.g. "U,-3")
- leg zone: L,<column> (column: -10 to +10, e.g. "L,-3")
It would be very helpful if this impact point could be stored as an attribute in the MME file.
Proposals for the attribute name:
- "Pedestrian impact point"
- "Pedestrian impact grid point"
The value could be stored in the following form: <x>,<y>
<x> and <y> could be the values as used by or similar to Euro NCAP or values in unit mm or m (<x> is the WAD, <y> the horizontal distance to the centre line (right side positive, left side negative values)
I appreciate your comments or alternative proposals.
Kind regards
Sebastian
MME attribute for the impact point of pedestrian protection tests
-
- Posts: 21
- Joined: Wed May 02, 2007 6:11 am
- Location: Moenchengladbach, Germany
- Contact:
-
- Posts: 431
- Joined: Tue Apr 24, 2007 9:14 am
- Company: IAT mbh
- Location: IAT Berlin - Germany
- Contact:
Re: MME attribute for the impact point of pedestrian protection tests
Dear Sebastian,
two comments for the proposal from my side:
1.If we go for a test type specific naming with "Pedestrian" of the descriptors, we should use optional (dot) descriptors.
2.In active safety we have used a specific notation for value pairs. Infact that was for multiple pairs in a row and
another application (see: viewtopic.php?t=675): But may we should use here also this writing stile?
We will need after the discussion a description for the new Red A
Kind regards,
Dirk
two comments for the proposal from my side:
1.If we go for a test type specific naming with "Pedestrian" of the descriptors, we should use optional (dot) descriptors.
2.In active safety we have used a specific notation for value pairs. Infact that was for multiple pairs in a row and
another application (see: viewtopic.php?t=675): But may we should use here also this writing stile?
We will need after the discussion a description for the new Red A
Kind regards,
Dirk
Re: MME attribute for the impact point of pedestrian protection tests
Hello,
I support the approach of using a tuple here.
In active security, there was also the suggestion for an attribute ". VUT striking point" (or ". Striking point TOB X"). We could combine both requirements here in a new attribute like "Striking point TO X", “Striking point test object X” or “Target point test object X”.
The value would ideally be tuples with units to cover:
Martin
I support the approach of using a tuple here.
In active security, there was also the suggestion for an attribute ". VUT striking point" (or ". Striking point TOB X"). We could combine both requirements here in a new attribute like "Striking point TO X", “Striking point test object X” or “Target point test object X”.
The value would ideally be tuples with units to cover:
- Percentages "(50%; 100%)“,
- counts (e.g. according to Euro NCAP) "(-5; 10)" and
- absolute values in the individual system of the object "(526mm; 80mm)"
Martin