ISO-MME

I have summarized all the additional codes we need to introduce for the Possible Channels of the BioRID:

AV for HEAD THSP01 and PELV
??HEAD0000BRAVX? , ??HEAD0000BRAVY? ??HEAD0000BRAVZ?
??THSP0100BRAVX? , ??THSP0100BRAVY? ??THSP0100BRAVZ?
??PELV0000BRAVX? , ??PELV0000BRAVY? ??PELV0000BRAVZ?

HEAD EV for Head contact to head rest
??HEAD????BREV??

CESP04 AC for Y
??CESP0400BRACY?

NECK LO Forces and Moments for 6 axis (currently FOX, FOZ, MOY)
??NECKLO??BRFOY?
??NECKLO??BRMOX?
??NECKLO??BRMOZ?
According to Denton COE there is no 6 axis available!


VW may uses THSP01 for Forces and Moments?

THSP AC on left and right side
??THSP01LEBRACX?
??THSP01RIBRACX?

LUSP05 Force and Moment location codes
??LUSP0500BRFOX?
??LUSP0500BRFOY?
??LUSP0500BRFOZ?

??LUSP0500BRMOX?
??LUSP0500BRMOY?
??LUSP0500BRMOZ?

also the figure needs to be updated!

..some more information / coding:

There are also some special spring load devices for the spine. These Muscle Substitute devices will be coded in accordance with Denton COE with the Main Location

MUSU = Muscle Substitutes

There are two Muscle Substitude devices on the side of the spine. One in front and one in rear. Force is measured in these devices:

??MUSUFR00BRFO0?
??MUSURE00BRFO0?

Code will be added to the 1.6p1!

please respect that some codes of the above proposal has been corrected:
THSP AC on left and right side
old NEW
??THSPLE??BRACX? -> ??THSP01LEBRACX?
??THSPRI??BRACX? -> ??THSP01RIBRACX?

A mismatch between the Figures and the Database has been recognized by Faurecia.

In the Sketch there is a SPIN01 Load Cell with 6 channels.
Actually the measurement is called NECKLO and just offers FOX, FOZ and MOY measurements.

I have attached the current status of the figure correction prepared in the Task Force for the BR.
The change requested by Faurecia is included (red remark).

On the Task Force meeting at the 12 April 2010 we discussed the naming of the Muscle Substitute force. After a long discussion we decided to have :
??SPMUFR00BRFO0? and ??SPMURE00BRFO0?

instead of the coding proposed before.(??MUSUFR00BRFO0? and ??MUSURE00BRFO0?)

If discussed this issue with DENTON and have been forwarded to pdb (pdb – Partnership for Dummy Technology and Biomechanics; http://www.pdb-org.com). Pdb has made several validation tests with BioRID and seems to be the only one who actually used this measurement for monitoring the outcome and the correspondence to the dummy behavior.

So I discussed again with pdb and that is the outcome:
- the measurement is on the Muscle Substitute device and not on the spine
- the measurement seems not to be correlated well to the spine behaviour
- the measurement is not likely to be used in the normal test case nor intended to be used in a criteria

Therefore pdb prefers to stay with the MUSU main location. And will do so for the several datasets they have got in the validation. They also suspect that this kind of muscle substitute device would not be used widely or in other locations in the future. Especially on that dummy.

So finally pdb propose to keep the MUSU in the database and prepare also the possible channel as described above.

I will prepare that for 1.6p3.

Implemented in db 1.6 p3