Side Impact Protection: Side Impact Dummy

Topics:  National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

[Federal Register: April 2, 1998 (Volume 63, Number 63)]
[Rules and Regulations]               
[Page 16136-16140]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr02ap98-19]

=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

49 CFR Parts 571 and 572

[Docket No. NHTSA-98-3668]
RIN 2127-AG37

 
Side Impact Protection: Side Impact Dummy

AGENCY: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), 
Department of Transportation.

ACTION: Final rule.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: This document makes two amendments to the specifications for 
the side impact test dummy and the procedure in NHTSA's side impact 
protection standard for positioning the dummy in a vehicle for 
compliance testing purposes. The first amendment adds plastic spacers 
to the dummy's lumbar spine to prevent a metal cable within the spine 
from contacting other metal parts in the spine (``snapping''). Some 
manufacturers believe that such contact can generate large spikes in 
the data obtained from the dummy. The second amendment specifies a 
procedure during the positioning of the dummy to fully extend the 
damper piston in the dummy's ribcage prior to the side impact test. 
These changes are intended to reduce to the extent possible any 
potential problems with the consistency of the data obtained from the 
dummy in a side impact crash test.

DATES: Effective Date: The amendments made in this rule are effective 
September 1, 1998.
    Incorporation by Reference Date: The incorporation by reference of 
the material listed in this document is approved by the Director of the 
Federal Register as of September 1, 1998.
    Petition Date: Any petitions for reconsideration must be received 
by NHTSA no later than May 18, 1998.

ADDRESSES: Any petitions for reconsideration should refer to the docket 
and notice number of this notice and be submitted to: Administrator, 
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, 400 Seventh Street, SW, 
Washington, DC 20590.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For nonlegal issues: Mr. Stan 
Backaitis, Office of Crashworthiness (telephone 202-366-4912). For 
legal issues: Ms. Deirdre Fujita, Office of the Chief Counsel (202-366-
2992). Both can be reached at the National Highway Traffic Safety 
Administration, 400 Seventh St., S.W., Washington, D.C., 20590.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
    Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 214, Side Impact 
Protection (49 CFR 571.214), establishes minimum performance 
requirements for protection of occupants in side impact crashes. The 
standard specifies a dynamic side impact test using a side impact dummy 
(SID) instrumented with accelerometer sensors mounted in the thorax and 
pelvis. The specifications for the side impact dummy are set out at 49 
CFR part 572, subpart F. Standard 214 requires that when vehicles are 
tested in accordance with the standard, the forces (the ``Thoracic 
Trauma Index'' (TTI(d)) measured by the SID must not exceed specified 
limits.
    This rule amends the part 572 specifications for the SID and the 
procedure in Standard 214 for positioning the dummy in a vehicle for 
compliance testing purposes. The amendments were proposed in a 
September 24, 1996 notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM). 61 FR 49992. 
(Docket No. 96-098, Notice 01.) The first amendment adds spacers into 
the top and bottom plates of the lumbar spine. The second amendment 
specifies a dummy positioning procedure that involves fully extending 
the damper piston in the dummy's ribcage. Both of these amendments are 
intended to reduce to the extent possible any potential problems with 
the consistency of the data obtained from the SID in a side impact 
crash test.

Lumbar Spine Inserts

    The NPRM was issued in response to concerns that a number of motor 
vehicle manufacturers raised in connection with spikes in data obtained 
from side impact

[[Page 16137]]

tests that increase the variability and the magnitude of the TTI(d). 
These concerns, discussed in detail in the NPRM and summarized below, 
relate to the construction of the SID lumbar spine. The lumbar spine is 
a molded hollow cylindrical rubber element, with bonded circular metal 
plates that have a hole in the center at each end. A metal cable passes 
through the center of the lumbar spine cylinder. The top end of the 
cable is threaded, and the bottom end is shaped like a ball. The 
threaded end of the cable is fastened with a nut, which can be 
tightened to provide the desired compression in the lumbar.
    In a June 29, 1994 letter to the agency, the American Automobile 
Manufacturers Association (AAMA), representing Ford, Chrysler 
Corporation and General Motors Corporation, raised concerns about the 
performance of the SID lumbar spine. AAMA said that metal-to-metal 
contact in the spine--

    Is inducing data spikes that are of long enough time duration to 
become part of the data when it is filtered according to the 
requirements of Standard No. 214. Inclusion of these data spikes in 
the data increases variability and unwarranted higher calculations 
of TTI(d). The spikes could cause manufacturers to redesign their 
vehicles for no safety reason other than an artifact of the SID. 
This redesign would increase business costs with no safety benefit 
to the customer.

    Concerns about data spikes were also raised by Toyota Motor 
Corporate Services of North America and Mercedes Benz.
    To correct the perceived problem, AAMA recommended the use of 
spacers, made of delrin, a type of plastic, in the top and bottom 
plates of the lumbar spine. AAMA stated that Ford found that, when the 
delrin spacers were used, the data spikes were eliminated. AAMA also 
said that in subsequent crash tests conducted by member companies, no 
indications of spine ringing were found when the spacers were used.
    After receiving these letters and comments, NHTSA reviewed data 
from its tests with the SID for evidence of spine spikes. The agency 
determined that none of the available agency experimental or vehicle 
compliance data indicated definitive evidence of data contamination 
and/or distortion clearly attributable to spine cable snap. Further, 
NHTSA believed that it appeared from data submitted by Ford that the 
``noise'' that the manufacturer found, while visible primarily in 
several portions of the raw data traces, would nonetheless be reduced 
to insignificant values by the specified FIR filter. Also, the noise 
consisted of extremely short duration spikes occurring earlier or 
considerably later than the peak acceleration magnitudes in real world 
crash tests.
    While the agency's data did not show that spine noise was affecting 
the post-filter test results, NHTSA conducted further investigations at 
the agency's Vehicle Research and Test Center (VRTC) to better 
understand the manufacturers' concerns. In January 1995, NHTSA 
determined through component tests of the SID torso that metal-to-metal 
contact of the SID's spine cable can produce spikes in the data. (A 
July 1996 memorandum describing the testing is in Docket 88-07, Notice 
3.) In the component tests, the SID upper torso part was rocked while 
the bottom half was held rigid. The rocking tests caused the cable ends 
to slip, resulting in the generation of low level ``clicking'' and some 
noise spikes in the ribcage response data. However, none of the rocking 
motions producing spine cable snap generated spikes that resembled the 
shape or magnitude of those described by AAMA or Toyota.
    NHTSA also found in the rocking tests that the delrin spacers, 
which AAMA suggested the agency should use in the SID spine, stopped 
the cable from slipping and eliminated the clicking noise. In a series 
of sled tests, NHTSA also determined that spines with spacers produce 
somewhat fewer spikes in the unfiltered data compared to tests without 
the spacers. In a subsequent series of impact tests, the agency 
established that the spacers had no appreciable effects on the 
stiffness of the spine, but resulted in lower magnitudes of spikes in 
the ``z'' (vertical) acceleration channel. NHTSA also found that the 
spacers have little, if any, effect on the TTI(d) value measurements. 
The above tests are described in a July 1996 memorandum in Docket 88-
07, Notice 3.
    While the agency's data did not support the claims of some 
manufacturers that spine noise affects the TTI(d) measurements to an 
extent that compels the possible redesign of their vehicles, NHTSA 
confirmed that the SID spine cable does move in a ``snap-like'' motion 
that can produce low level spikes that are clearly visible in 
unfiltered raw data. The agency tentatively concluded in the NPRM that 
this ``noise,'' while negligible after FIR filtering, is nonetheless 
undesirable in itself as part of the crash event. ``Any looseness or 
snapping of components within the SID can produce rattling or 
unwarranted snapping effects that could potentially distort the data 
from the dummy and possibly complicate compliance testing'' (61 FR at 
49994). NHTSA therefore proposed that lumbar spine spacers should be 
required in the SID to prevent such movement.
    The agency received comments on this proposal from Volkswagen of 
America, Toyota Motor Corporation, and AAMA. These commenters supported 
adding lumbar spine spacers to the SID. Toyota submitted test data 
showing that after spacers were added to several of its test dummies, 
``no remaining appreciable traces of spine ringing remained * * *'' 
AAMA ``strongly support[ed]'' the proposal:

    This modification to the SID specifications has been shown to 
prevent metal-to-metal contact in the lumbar spine that under the 
current specifications, erroneously and randomly adds artificial 
spikes to the SID acceleration traces during side impact testing.

    NHTSA has evaluated the comments and has decided to require the 
spacers, for the reasons explained in the NPRM. As explained in the 
proposal, ``noise'' from movement of the spine cable should be 
minimized to the extent reasonably possible and spacers inserted into 
appropriate places in the spine are a reasonable means of effectively 
preventing such movement. The cost of the two spacers is estimated to 
be $154. Given that on average, a SID can be used in at least 30 tests, 
the cost of the spacers is at most $5 per impact test.
    To incorporate the use of lumbar spine spacers, this rule replaces 
dummy assembly drawing SA-SID-M050, revision A (dated May 18, 1994) 
with revision B. Revision B includes reference to:
    1. Drawing Lumbar Spacers-Lower SID-SM-001, indicating the spine 
lower spacer;
    2. Drawing Lumbar Spacers-Upper SID-SM-002, indicating the spine 
upper spacer; and
    3. Drawing 78051-243, indicating a washer.
(The drawings for the SID spine lower spacer and upper spacer are 
depicted in the NPRM as figures 1 and 2, respectively. 61 FR at 49995, 
49996.)
    The SID users manual is revised to reflect the assembly of the 
above parts.

Damper Piston Movement

    During the sled tests that the agency conducted to evaluate the 
effect of spacers in the SID lumbar spine, NHTSA observed that the 
position of the damper piston in the SID ribcage prior to the test had 
an appreciable effect on the thorax accelerations recorded by the SID. 
In some tests, some of the thorax responses contained initial short 
duration damper piston movement in the opposite direction of impact, 
followed by a longer duration

[[Page 16138]]

movement in the direction of impact. Upon closer inspection of the 
damper piston position in dummies set up for impact, NHTSA noted that 
the damper position was not fully extended in some of the dummies. The 
agency subsequently found, through tests with the damper piston 
position purposely fully extended or partly compressed, that the damper 
piston's initial position can be an important factor in determining 
whether the dummy's key thorax sensors will record higher or lower 
accelerations.
    In a side impact test in which contact occurs first at the dummy's 
hip level, a dummy's ribcage initially moves (relative to the pelvis 
bone) toward the impact. When the damper piston is partly compressed 
prior to impact, the damper piston will fully extend itself during 
impact until it is arrested by the piston bottoming out against the 
damper body. The test data indicate that this internal ``collision'' of 
the damper piston against the damper body is the primary cause of 
inconsistency in data measurements and the determination of 
acceleration levels. This collision does not occur when the piston is 
fully extended within the damper body prior to the test.
    Prior to these tests, the agency believed that a piston return 
spring in the SID would develop sufficient force to set the damper 
piston in the fully extended position. It appeared from the tests, 
however, that the spring is not stiff enough to set the piston in every 
dummy in the fully extended position and that steps to ensure extension 
of the piston are necessary. To better ensure that the impact response 
measurements are more repeatable and reproducible, NHTSA proposed to 
specify in Standard 214's SID positioning procedures that the damper 
piston is in the fully extended position before the test.
    In the NPRM, the agency stated that the piston can be fully 
extended by rocking a seated dummy in the lateral direction immediately 
prior to a test or by reaching through a partly unzipped SID torso 
jacket and forcing the piston into a full extension. NHTSA believed 
these measures will ensure that the damper piston is in the fully 
extended position at the time of the side impact test. NHTSA 
tentatively concluded that a visual inspection appears to be adequate 
to ensure that the piston is fully extended. Comments were requested on 
whether a position sensor would be needed.
    Volkswagen, Toyota and American Honda Motor Co., Inc. supported the 
proposal to specify in Standard 214's SID positioning procedures to 
fully extend the damper piston before the test. Honda submitted test 
data showing that ``Both rib and spine Gs are varied with the initial 
piston positions, and more than a negligible amount of the difference 
in TTI is observed.'' Honda said, however, that it is concerned as to 
how to confirm that the damper piston is fully extended prior to the 
dynamic test ``since it is not easy to reach and ensure the piston 
position without affecting the SIDs already correctly positioned in the 
test vehicle.'' Honda suggested marking the damper piston to show the 
fully extended position. The mark could be visible through the 
partially unzipped SID torso jacket without moving the SID. While 
supporting the proposal, Volkswagen and Toyota said that use of a rib 
cage position sensor should not be a mandatory part of the 
specifications.
    AAMA opposed the proposal. It said that the damper-related data 
anomalies NHTSA recorded during sled tests have not been observed in 
manufacturers' full vehicle crash tests.

    The sled test setup NHTSA used was unrealistic due to the large 
protruding armrest installed first, to cause an initial pelvic 
impact and then, to force the upper body to rotate toward the door 
of the vehicle. Dummy kinematics of this nature are not common in a 
normal FMVSS-214 crash test. AAMA believes that this unrealistic 
testing caused the SID to exhibit these damper-induced data 
anomalies.

AAMA also stated that the fully extended position of the damper piston 
often cannot be maintained consistently prior to the crash test (``pre-
test'') due to the tight fit of the SID chest jacket. ``Considerable 
time could be spent pre-test trying to maintain the damper position 
once the jacket is re-zipped.'' In addition, AAMA did not support a 
requirement for a chest damper position sensor, because the bracket 
that would be used to mount the sensor can cause metal-to-metal contact 
with the sternum or spine box. ``Use of the sensor, therefore, should 
remain optional.''
    After considering the comments, NHTSA has decided to amend Standard 
214 to adopt a procedure to extend the damper piston prior to dynamic 
testing. The specification will better ensure the repeatability and 
reproducibility of test results. As discussed in the NPRM, the agency's 
testing indicated that the damper piston's initial position can be an 
important factor in determining whether the dummy's key thorax sensors 
will record higher or lower accelerations. Honda also found that the 
initial piston position affected rib and spine Gs and TTI(d) values and 
that extending the damper piston is needed to ensure that test results 
are consistent and reproducible. Ensuring that the damper piston is 
extended will eradicate a possible source of data distortion from the 
agency's compliance test.
    In response to AAMA's comments, the agency acknowledges that the 
tests at VRTC were designed to show that spikes could be present in 
data if the damper piston were not fully extended. In the tests, the 
pelvis was impacted about six inches before the thorax was impacted, to 
initially force the ribs outward. However, the agency does not agree 
that the VRTC tests resulted in irrelevant or unrealistic dummy 
kinematics. NHTSA's side impact test reports indicate that the pelvis 
of the dummy was impacted approximately 1-7 ms earlier than the ribcage 
structure in 72 percent of the tests. Also, NHTSA examined the damper 
position in SIDs that were set up on vehicle seats readied for dynamic 
side impact testings and found that these showed a piston position up 
to 7 mm (0.28 inches) from full extension. This suggests that the 
potential exists that damper piston positioning could affect rib 
acceleration responses in actual Standard 214 tests. Inasmuch as a 
damper piston position in tests with dummies in real vehicles is 
similar to the position in the laboratory set-up, the agency concludes 
that there is a potential for experiencing a piston collision-related 
spike problem in actual Standard 214 tests.
    While data from NHTSA's vehicle crash tests thus far do not 
indicate the effects of a damper piston collision, future designs of 
vehicle interiors, side structure or impact surfaces may exacerbate the 
motion of the damper piston, artificially increasing acceleration 
measurements. The agency believes removing this potential complication 
from compliance testing is a reasonable step toward ensuring the 
integrity of future side impact tests.
    The agency recognizes that some commenters expressed concern about 
the means by which users can extend the piston. NHTSA stated in the 
NPRM that the piston can be fully extended by rocking a seated dummy in 
the lateral direction immediately prior to a test or by reaching 
through a partly unzipped SID torso jacket and forcing the piston into 
a full extension (61 FR at 49997). In response, Honda stated that ``it 
is not easy to reach and ensure the piston position without affecting 
the SIDs already correctly positioned in the test vehicle.'' AAMA 
stated that it believed that ``the fully extended position of the 
damper piston often cannot be maintained consistently prior to the 
crash test (pre-test) due to the tight fit of the SID chest jacket. 
Considerable time could be spent pre-test trying to

[[Page 16139]]

maintain the damper position once the jacket is re-zipped.''
    As a result of these comments, NHTSA undertook testing at VRTC to 
determine whether there is a simple way of fully extending the piston, 
other than by rocking the dummy or by reaching through a partially 
unzipped jacket. Two different side impact dummies were used, both with 
and without SID chest jackets. Jackets from different manufacturers 
were used. These jackets were measured both externally and internally 
to examine differences in sizes between dummies made by different 
manufacturers. Size differences could result in tighter or looser fits 
which might have differing influences on the return of the damper 
piston to its extended position.
    NHTSA verified its earlier finding that the return spring on the 
damper did not always return the damper to its fully extended position, 
either with or without the chest jacket. The agency also determined 
that the damper piston could be fully extended on the dummy by holding 
the dummy's head in place and pushing the non-impact side of the dummy 
with approximately 15 to 20 lb. force. This procedure repositioned the 
damper piston at the fully extended position, regardless of whether a 
chest jacket is used or which type of chest jacket is on the dummy. 
Copies of the reports discussing the test results have been placed in 
the docket. ``SID Damper Piston Extension Measurement,'' April 22, 
1997, ``SID Damper in Car Positioning Tests,'' May 1, 1997, and ``Table 
1. Measurements of SID Damper Potentiometer from Fully Extended 
Position for Various SID Dummies'' May 5, 1997.
    By using a linear potentiometer to measure the extended position of 
the damper, the agency verified that the procedure consistently 
extended the damper piston to the fully extended position. Because the 
procedure attained consistent results, the agency is confident that the 
procedure achieves the desired end. Thus, the agency believes that a 
sensor is not needed to confirm that the damper is returned to the 
fully extended position.
    This rule specifies an effective date slightly sooner than 180 days 
from the date of publication. NHTSA believes the September 1, 1998 
effective date is in the public interest. September 1 is the effective 
date typically chosen by the agency for new performance requirements 
since September or October is the beginning of a new model year for 
most vehicle manufacturers. Use of this date ensures that the new 
requirements apply to all motor vehicles produced in the model year 
beginning on or about that date. Thus, virtually all model year 1999 
vehicles would be tested with the SID modified as specified in this 
rule. The required modifications to the test dummy adopted by this rule 
are generally minor and can be implemented by dummy manufacturers 
within the provided leadtime. While the modifications better ensure the 
repeatability and reproducibility of side impact test results, the 
agency anticipates that they will not have a bearing on the compliance 
of vehicle manufactured today and that vehicles will not need to be 
redesigned because of today's amendments.
    This rule also updates the name and address of the firm referenced 
in Sec. 572.40(b) from which copies of the SID drawings, users manual 
and other materials incorporated by reference may be obtained.

Rulemaking Analyses and Notices

Executive Order 12866 and DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures

    NHTSA has considered the impact of this rulemaking action under 
E.O. 12866 and the Department of Transportation's regulatory policies 
and procedures. This rulemaking document was not reviewed under E.O. 
12866, ``Regulatory Planning and Review.'' This action has been 
determined to be ``non-significant'' under the Department of 
Transportation's regulatory policies and procedures. The amendments 
will not require any vehicle design changes, but will instead require 
only minor modifications in the test dummy used to evaluate a vehicle's 
compliance with Standard No. 214. According to Applied Safety 
Technologies Corporation (formerly Vector Research), a dummy 
manufacturer, the two delrin spacers (lumbar spine inserts) cost $154. 
Thus far, these have been precision machined parts aimed to satisfy 
individual low volume orders. The cost is expected to decrease 
considerably once the other dummy manufacturer (FTSS) begins 
manufacturing the spacers. If use of spacers increases, dummy 
manufacturers may seek to produce them through precision molding, which 
could further reduce the cost of the spacer. The agency has accordingly 
determined that the impacts of the amendments will be so minimal that a 
full regulatory evaluation is not required.

Regulatory Flexibility Act

    NHTSA has also considered the impacts of this rule under the 
Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. Sec. 601 et seq.). I hereby 
certify that this rule will not have a significant economic impact on a 
substantial number of small entities.
    The factual basis for the certification (5 U.S.C. Sec. 605(b)) is 
as follows. The final rule would primarily affect passenger car and 
light truck manufacturers and manufacturers of dummies. As described 
above, there will be no significant economic impact on any vehicle 
manufacturer, whether large or small. Even if the rule were to have a 
significant economic impact, there is not a substantial number of small 
entities that manufacture vehicles. The Small Business Administration's 
(SBA's) size standards are organized according to Standard Industrial 
Classification Codes (SIC). SIC Code 3711 ``Motor Vehicles and 
Passenger Car Bodies'' has a small business size standard of 1,000 
employees or fewer. For passenger car and light truck manufacturers, 
NHTSA estimates there are at most five small manufacturers of passenger 
cars in the U.S. Because each manufacturer serves a niche market, often 
specializing in replicas of ``classic'' cars, production for each 
manufacturer is fewer than 100 cars per year. Thus, there are at most 
five hundred cars manufactured per year by U.S. small businesses. In 
contrast, in 1996, there are approximately nine large manufacturers 
manufacturing passenger cars and light trucks in the U.S. Total U.S. 
manufacturing production per year is approximately 15 to 15 and a half 
million passenger cars and light trucks per year. NHTSA does not 
believe small businesses manufacture even 0.1 percent of total U.S. 
passenger car and light truck production per year.
    SIC Code 3714 ``Motor Vehicle Parts and Accessories'' has a small 
business size standard of 750 employees or fewer. NHTSA believes dummy 
manufacturers would fall under SIC Code 3714. There are three dummy 
manufacturers in this country, all of which are believed to be of a 
size that constitutes a small business. NHTSA does not believe this 
rule will have a significant economic impact on these entities. The 
rule will require only minor modifications (the addition of two delrin 
spacers) to the side impact dummy. The delrin spacers are relatively 
inexpensive components, costing approximately $154 for two. Further, 
NHTSA believes the cost of the spacer will decrease when they are 
produced in high volumes.
    The cost of new passenger cars and light trucks will not be 
affected by the final rule. Because no price increases will be 
associated with the rule, small organizations and small governmental 
units will not be affected in their capacity as purchasers of new 
vehicles.

[[Page 16140]]

National Environmental Policy Act

    NHTSA has also analyzed this rule under the National Environmental 
Policy Act and determined that it will not have a significant impact on 
the human environment.

Executive Order 12612 (Federalism)

    NHTSA has analyzed this rule in accordance with the principles and 
criteria contained in E.O. 12612, and has determined that this rule 
will not have significant federalism implications to warrant the 
preparation of a Federalism Assessment.

Civil Justice Reform

    This rule will not have any retroactive effect. Under 49 U.S.C. 
30103, whenever a Federal motor vehicle safety standard is in effect, a 
State may not adopt or maintain a safety standard applicable to the 
same aspect of performance which is not identical to the Federal 
standard, except to the extent that the state requirement imposes a 
higher level of performance and applies only to vehicles procured for 
the State's use. 49 U.S.C. 30161 sets forth a procedure for judicial 
review of final rules establishing, amending or revoking Federal motor 
vehicle safety standards. That section does not require submission of a 
petition for reconsideration or other administrative proceedings before 
parties may file suit in court.

List of Subjects

49 CFR Part 571

    Imports, Motor vehicle safety, Motor vehicles.

49 CFR Part 572

    Incorporation by reference, Motor vehicle safety.

    In consideration of the foregoing, NHTSA amends 49 CFR Parts 571 
and 572 as set forth below.

PART 571--FEDERAL MOTOR VEHICLE SAFETY STANDARDS

    1. The authority citation for Part 571 continues to read as 
follows:

    Authority: 49 U.S.C. 322, 30111, 30115, 30117 and 30166; 
delegation of authority at 49 CFR 1.50.

    2. Section 571.214 is amended by adding introductory text for S7.1, 
Torso, to read as follows:


Sec. 571.214  Standard No. 214; side impact protection.

* * * * *
    S7.1  Torso. For a test dummy in any seating position, hold the 
dummy's head in place and push laterally on the non-impacted side of 
the upper torso in a single stroke with a force of 15-20 lb. towards 
the impacted side.
* * * * *

49 CFR PART 572--ANTHROPOMORPHIC TEST DUMMIES

Subpart F--Side Impact Dummy 50th Percentile Male

    3. The authority citation for Part 572 continues to read as 
follows:

    Authority: 49 U.S.C. 322, 30111, 30115, 30117 and 30166; 
delegation of authority at 49 CFR 1.50.

    4. In Sec. 572.40, paragraph (b) is revised to read as follows:


Sec. 572.40  Incorporated materials.

* * * * *
    (b) The materials incorporated in this part by reference are 
available for examination in the general reference section of Docket 
79-04, Docket Section, National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, 
room 5109, 400 Seventh St., S.W., Washington, D.C., 20590, telephone 
(202) 366-4949. Copies may be obtained from Reprographic Technologies, 
9000 Virginia Manor Rd., Suite 210, Beltsville, MD, 20705, Telephone 
(301) 419-5070, Fax (301) 419-5069.
    5. In section 572.41, the introductory paragraph of (a), and entire 
paragraphs (a)(4) and (c) are revised to read as follows:


Sec. 572.41  General description.

    (a) The dummy consists of component parts and component assemblies 
(SA-SID-M001, revision C, dated September 12, 1996, and SA-SID-M001A, 
revision B, dated September 12, 1996), which are described in 
approximately 250 drawings and specifications that are set forth in 
Sec. 572.5(a) of this chapter with the following changes and additions 
which are described in approximately 85 drawings and specifications 
(incorporated by reference; see Sec. 572.40):
* * * * *
    (4) The lumbar spine consists of the assembly specified in subpart 
B (Sec. 572.9(a)) and conforms to drawing SA 150 M050 and drawings 
subtended by SA-SID-M050 revision B, dated September 12, 1996, 
including the addition of Lumbar Spacers-Lower SID-SM-001 and Lumbar 
Spacers-Upper SID-SM-002 (both dated May 12, 1994), and Washer 78051-
243.
* * * * *
    (c) Disassembly, inspection, and assembly procedures; external 
dimensions and weight; and a dummy drawing list are set forth in the 
Side Impact Dummy (SID) User's Manual, dated May 1994 except for pages 
7, 20 and 23, and Appendix A (consisting of replacement pages 7, 20 and 
23) dated January 20, 1998 (incorporated by reference; see 
Sec. 572.40).
    6. In Sec. 572.43, paragraph (a) is revised to read as follows:


Sec. 572.43  Lumbar spine and pelvis.

    (a) When the pelvis of a fully assembled dummy (SA-SID-M001A 
revision B, dated September 12, 1996, (incorporated by reference; see 
Sec. 572.40) is impacted laterally by a test probe conforming to 
Sec. 572.44(a) at 14 fps in accordance with paragraph (b) of this 
section, the peak acceleration at the location of the accelerometer 
mounted in the pelvis cavity in accordance with Sec. 572.44(c) shall be 
not less than 40g and not more than 60g. The acceleration-time curve 
for the test shall be unimodal and shall lie at or above the +20g level 
for an interval not less than 3 milliseconds and not more than 7 
milliseconds.
* * * * *
    Issued: March 26, 1998.
Ricardo Martinez,
Administrator.
[FR Doc. 98-8452 Filed 4-1-98; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-59-P