Crash testing programs to provide consumers with comparative information about new vehicle safety are well established in many countries. The publicity generated by these programs has resulted in tests and evaluation criteria becoming defacto standards for many automakers. This presentation will review the frontal and side crash test evaluations of new vehicles, together with the new rear impact evaluations of seats and head restraints conducted by the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety (IIHS). The differences between these evaluations and those conducted by the U.S. federal government will be discussed in relation to the U.S. vehicle fleet and crash environment. The desire by automakers for the various NCAPs to be harmonized is understandable. However, it is not clear that harmonization would in all cases benefit consumers. The 64 km/h offset frontal test conducted by IIHS and other NCAP programs is a harmonized test but the evaluation criteria are not. In the case of side impacts, however, at least three different consumer tests are used, and they differ in their severities, test dummies, and evaluation criteria. The pros and cons of harmonizing NCAP tests and evaluation criteria will be discussed.
New car assessment programs - Is harmonization feasible or desirable
NCAP - Ist Harmonisierung machbar oder wünschenswert?
2005
15 Seiten, 11 Bilder, 10 Quellen
Aufsatz (Konferenz)
Englisch
New car assessment programs : Is harmonization feasible or desirable
Kraftfahrwesen | 2005
|Automated video assessment of FLS training: feasible and desirable
British Library Conference Proceedings | 2013
|Assessment of Earth Observations Data Harmonization
AIAA | 2003
|Transportation Research Record | 2013
|