[Federal Register Volume 69, Number 235 (Wednesday, December 8, 2004)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 70947-70971]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 04-26753]



[[Page 70947]]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

49 CFR Part 572

[Docket No. NHTSA-2004-18865]
RIN 2127-AJ16


Anthropomorphic Test Devices; SID-IIsFRG Side Impact Crash Test 
Dummy (SID-IIs With Floating Rib Guide Modifications); 5th Percentile 
Adult Female

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

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

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

SUMMARY: This document proposes specifications and qualification 
requirements for a 5th percentile adult female test dummy for use in 
vehicle side impact tests. NHTSA has published an NPRM to amend Federal 
Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 214, ``Side Impact Protection,'' to 
add a dynamic pole test to the standard. Under that proposal, all 
passenger vehicles with a gross vehicle weight rating of 4,536 
kilograms (10,000 pounds) or less would have to protect front seat 
occupants against head, thoracic, abdominal and pelvic injuries in a 
vehicle-to-pole test simulating a vehicle's side impact crash into 
narrow fixed objects like telephone poles and trees. Two newly 
developed anthropomorphic test dummies would be used in the pole test: 
One representing a 5th percentile adult female, and one representing a 
50th percentile adult male. Today's document proposes the 
specifications and qualification requirements for the 5th percentile 
female dummy. The 5th percentile adult female crash test dummy allows 
regulators and researchers to assess the actual performance of vehicles 
in protecting small-stature occupants in side impacts.

DATES: You should submit your comments early enough to ensure that 
Docket Management receives them not later than March 8, 2005.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments (identified by the DOT DMS Docket 
Number) by any of the following methods:
     Web site: http://dms.dot.gov. Follow the instructions for 
submitting comments on the DOT electronic docket site.
     Fax: 1-202-493-2251.
     Mail: Docket Management Facility; U.S. Department of 
Transportation, 400 Seventh Street, SW., Nassif Building, Room PL-401, 
Washington, DC 20590-001.
    Hand Delivery: Room PL-401 on the plaza level of the Nassif 
Building, 400 Seventh Street, SW., Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 
p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal Holidays.
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the online instructions for submitting 
comments.
    Instructions: All submissions must include the agency name and 
docket number or Regulatory Identification Number (RIN) for this 
rulemaking. For detailed instructions on submitting comments and 
additional information on the rulemaking process, see the Public 
Participation heading of the Supplementary Information section of this 
document. Note that all comments received will be posted without change 
to http://dms.dot.gov, including any personal information provided. 
Please see the Privacy Act discussion under the Public Participation 
heading.
    Docket: For access to the docket to read background documents or 
comments received, go to http://dms.dot.gov at any time or to Room PL-
401 on the plaza level of the Nassif Building, 400 Seventh Street, SW., 
Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, 
except Federal holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For non-legal issues, you may call 
Stan Backaitis, NHTSA Office of Crashworthiness Standards (telephone: 
(202) 366-4912). For legal issues, you may call Deirdre R. Fujita, 
NHTSA Office of Chief Counsel ((202) 366-2992). You may send mail to 
these officials at the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, 
400 Seventh St., SW., Washington, DC, 20590.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Table of Contents

I. Introduction
II. Background
    a. Need for the Dummy
    b. Development of the FRG
III. Description
IV. Biofidelity
V. Repeatability and Reproducibility
    a. Component Tests
    b. Sled Tests
    1. 6.7 m/s Flat Wall Test Results.
    2. 6.0 m/s Flat Wall Test Results.
    3. Abdominal Offset Tests
VI. Pelvis Plug
VII. Durability
VIII. Reversibility for Right and Left Use
IX. Directional Impact Sensitivity
X. Proposed Calibration Tests
Rulemaking Analyses and Notices
Public Participation

I. Introduction

    This document relates to an NPRM previously issued by NHTSA (69 FR 
27990, May 17, 2004; Docket 2004-17694) that proposed to add a vehicle-
to-pole test to Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) No. 214, 
``Side Impact Protection'' (49 CFR 571.214). The pole test simulates a 
vehicle's side impact crash into narrow fixed objects like telephone 
poles and trees. If adopted as a final rule, the proposed pole test 
could result in the installation of dynamically deploying side impact 
air bag systems and other measures to protect front seat occupants 
against head, thoracic, abdominal and pelvic injuries in side crashes.
    In the proposed pole test, an anthropomorphic test dummy 
representing a 5th percentile adult female is in the front outboard 
seat on the struck side of the vehicle. Vehicles would have to be 
certified as complying with an established head injury criterion and 
with thoracic and pelvic injury criteria developed for the new dummy. 
The agency has also proposed to use this dummy in FMVSS No. 214's 
existing moving deformable barrier (MDB) test, which simulates a moving 
vehicle-to-vehicle ``T-bone'' type intersection crash. Today's NPRM 
proposes the specifications and calibration requirements for the 5th 
percentile adult female test dummy that NHTSA seeks to use in these 
FMVSS No. 214 crash tests.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ The dummy proposed today represents the lower end of the 5th 
percentile female population range by mass distribution. However, 
the erect seated height is nearly at the mid point of that 
population range.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The development of a small, second-generation side impact dummy was 
undertaken in 1993 by the Occupant Safety Research Partnership (OSRP), 
a consortium of the U.S. Council for Automotive Research (USCAR), and 
dummy manufacturer First Technology Safety Systems (FTSS). (USCAR was 
formed in 1992 by DaimlerChrysler, Ford and General Motors, as a 
research and development organization.) The OSRP determined that there 
was a need for a test dummy that would be better suited to help 
evaluate the performance of advanced side impact countermeasures, 
notably air bags, for occupants that are smaller than the 50th 
percentile size male. The new dummy was named SID-IIs, indicating 
``SID'' as side impact dummy, ``II'' as second generation, and ``s'' as 
small. The SID-IIs dummy was extensively tested in the late 1990s and 
early 2000 in vehicle crashes by Transport Canada, and to a limited 
extent by U.S. automobile

[[Page 70948]]

manufacturers and suppliers, and the Insurance Institute for Highway 
Safety (IIHS).
    The dummy specified in today's document is a modified version of 
the original SID-IIs dummy. NHTSA's laboratory evaluation of the 
biofidelity of the SID-IIs revealed chest displacement transducer 
mechanical failures and some ribcage and shoulder structural problems. 
Post test evidence showed that the ribs of the unmodified SID-IIs did 
not remain constrained by the rib guides, which allowed their vertical 
motion during some impactor and sled tests, which in turn raised 
concerns regarding the structural integrity of the ribs and the 
deflection potentiometers, as well as the accuracy of the deflection 
measurements. The agency's Vehicle Research and Test Center (VRTC) 
modified the dummy's thorax in 2001 to incorporate floating rib guides 
to better stabilize the kinematics of the dummy's ribs, and revised the 
shoulder and its rib guide design to prevent distorting vertical rib 
motion. The modified dummy proposed today is hereinafter referred to as 
the ``SID-IIsFRG,'' the ``FRG'' indicating the floating rib guide and 
other modifications to the dummy.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ NHTSA has placed in docket 17694 a technical report 
entitled, ``Development of the SID-IIsFRG,'' Rhule and Hagedorn, 
November 2003, which describes the need for and extent and purpose 
of the FRG modifications.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The SID-IIsFRG has a mass of 44.5 kg (98 pounds) and a seated 
height of 790 mm (31.1 inches). The dummy is capable of measuring 
accelerations, deflections and/or forces in the head, thorax, shoulder, 
abdomen and pelvis body regions. The dummy is described in detail in a 
NHTSA technical report entitled, ``Summary of the NHTSA Evaluation of 
the SID-IIsFRG Side Impact Crash Test Dummy Including Assessment of 
Durability, Biofidelity, Repeatability, Reproducibility and Directional 
Sensitivity'' (November 2004), and in the PADI document (October 2004), 
which have been placed in the docket for today's NPRM. (A number of 
technical reports providing further test details on the dummy, such as 
its repeatability and reproducibility, have also been placed in docket 
17694, supra.)

II. Background

a. Need for the Dummy

    Data from the 1990-2001 National Automotive Sampling System (NASS) 
Crashworthiness Data System (CDC) indicate a need for a dummy that has 
the capability of predicting the risk of injury to a segment of small-
statured vehicle occupants in side crashes. Table 1 shows the injury 
distribution of the estimated target population less than 65 inches 
(in) in stature in all types of side impact crashes between 12 and 25 
mph delta V.

    Table 1.--U.S. Motor Vehicle Small Stature Adult Occupant Population Injury Severity Distribution in Side
                                                     Crashes
                                           [For delta-V of 12-25 mph]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
         Body region            MAIS 1      MAIS 2      MAIS 3      MAIS 4      MAIS 5     Fatality      Total
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Head and Face...............        6706        1864          99         142         163         527        9049
Thorax......................        4377         295        1213         671          11         446        7094
Abdomen.....................         264          86          20         112          27          96         670
Pelvis......................           0           0         123           0           0           6         136
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The 1990-2001 NASS/CDS data also indicate that there are 
differences in the body region distribution of serious injuries between 
small and medium stature occupants in these side collisions. The data 
suggests that small stature occupants have a higher proportion of head, 
abdominal and pelvic injuries than medium stature occupants, and a 
lower proportion of chest injuries (Samaha et al., ``NHTSA Side Impact 
Research: Motivation for Upgraded Test Procedures,'' 18th ESV 
Conference Proceedings). The agency believes that, in addition to a 
50th percentile adult male dummy, use of a small-statured dummy in side 
impact testing would better represent the population at-risk in side 
impacts and substantially enhance protection for small adult occupants.

b. Development of the FRG

    NHTSA began an extensive evaluation of the SID-IIs in 2000. The 
biofidelity of the dummy was assessed in component and sled testing 
that examined the ability of the dummy to load a vehicle as a cadaver 
does, and to replicate cadaver responses that best predict injury 
potential. Our finding from the sled tests was that a 8.9 m/s test was 
too severe to assess the durability and other characteristics of the 
dummy. Some of the 8.9 m/s tests resulted in damaged ribs, bent 
potentiometer shafts and crushed potentiometer housings. NHTSA's 
examination of the causes of the damage to the SID-IIs revealed the rib 
guides for the shoulder, thorax and abdomen ribs did not sufficiently 
prevent vertical movement of the ribs (``rib jump''), and that the 
dummy's rib stops allowed excessive deflection of the ribs. The 
observed damage raised concerns regarding the structural integrity of 
the ribs and the deflection measuring potentiometers, as well as the 
accuracy of the dummy's deflection measurements, particularly for a 
dummy that could possibly be used for regulatory purposes.
    After extensive evaluation of these failures, the agency began 
incremental modifications of the dummy to improve the dummy's 
durability.\3\ Because vertical movement of the ribs was deemed to be 
one of the causes for the damage to the thorax and abdomen regions of 
the dummy, VRTC developed the ``floating rib guide'' system, which 
prevents the compressed ribs from leaving the outside perimeter of the 
rib guides. The new guides ``float'' with the ribs as they expand in 
the anterior-posterior direction during the compression process, and 
thereby prevent rib jump. The FRG design includes deeper rib guides 
than on the unmodified SID-IIs dummy in both the thorax and abdomen 
regions. During deflection, the ribs contact carbon fiber cover plates 
affixed to the rib guides in the front and rear of the dummy. Guide 
pins and springs allow the rib guides to expand outwards, thus 
maintaining the ribs within the outside perimeter of the rib guides 
during the deflection event.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ The technical report ``Development of the SID-IIs FRG,'' 
supra, describes the history and evaluation of the design changes 
made to the SID-IIs dummy between the fall of 2000 and the spring of 
2003.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In addition, the shoulder rib guide of the dummy was reshaped and 
deepened beyond the front edge of the shoulder rib to keep the shoulder 
rib from moving vertically during its compression. The damping material 
of the shoulder rib

[[Page 70949]]

assembly was made thinner and spanned the entire width of the steel 
band. The FRG design used vinyl-coated aluminum rib stops to reduce 
excessive rib deflection, as excessive deflection was also one of the 
causes of bent potentiometer shafts and crushed potentiometer housings. 
To further protect the instrumentation, the new rib stops were located 
to reduce the maximum lateral rib deflection from 69 mm to 60 mm.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ The FRG design also incorporated other changes, such as the 
use of a cable tie to attach the dummy's thorax and abdomen pads to 
the ribs, and the removal of \1/4\ inch from the top of the abdomen 
pad to avoid interference with the thorax pad.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    NHTSA conducted sled tests and air bag out-of-position tests 
comparing the durability of the FRG dummy to an unmodified SID-IIs 
dummy. The tests showed that the SID-IIsFRG design prevented rib jump 
and potentiometer damage that were evident in the unmodified dummy. 
These results are discussed in section VII of this preamble.
    NHTSA also conducted tests to compare the measurement capabilities 
and response levels of the SID-IIsFRG to the SID-IIs dummy (``Summary 
of the NHTSA Evaluation of the SID-IIsFRG Side Impact Crash Test Dummy 
Including Assessment of Durability, Biofidelity, Repeatability, 
Reproducibility and Directional Sensitivity'' (November 2004), supra.) 
The SID-IIsFRG displayed comparable measurements in all conditions 
except for high-speed flat wall sled tests and high-speed purely 
lateral probe impacts to the upper torso of the dummy. During these 
tests, the SID-IIsFRG dummy exhibited smaller rib deflections (10 
percent smaller), but larger thorax load wall forces (17 percent) and 
T1 accelerations (20 percent larger) than the SID-IIs. Similar trends 
of reduced chest deflections between SID-IIs FRG and SID-IIs were 
reported by Transport Canada in a set of paired side impact crash tests 
of two identical Camry vehicles in limited vehicle crash tests (``SID-
IIs Response in Side Impact Testing,'' Tylko and Dalmotas, SAE Paper 
No. 2004-01-0350).
    NHTSA also conducted two pairs of repeat crash tests comparing the 
SID-IIsFRG and the SID-IIs (``Development of the SID-IIsFRG,'' supra). 
The two tests included repeat oblique pole impacts with a dummy in the 
driver seat of a 2002 Ford Explorer. One of the tests was with the SID-
IIsFRG (test number v4563), and the other was with the SID-IIs (test 
number v4601). NHTSA also conducted a pair of repeat tests using the 
Side New Car Assessment Program (NCAP) protocol \5\ with a 2001 Ford 
Focus, the first with a SID-IIsFRG in the driver's seat and an 
unmodified SID-IIs in the rear left passenger seat (test number v4576), 
and the second with an unmodified SID-IIs in the driver's seat and a 
SID-IIsFRG in the rear left passenger seat (test number v4562).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ In the agency's New Car Assessment Program (NCAP), the FMVSS 
No. 214 moving deformable barrier impacts the vehicle at 38.5 miles 
per hour.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In this limited set of repeat crash tests by the agency, the 
results indicated that maximum thorax and abdomen deflections for the 
SID-IIsFRG, for the most part, were less than those of the SID-IIs. The 
limited crash test results appear to be consistent in trend with 
impactor and sled test results.

III. Description

    A technical report and other materials describing the SID-IIsFRG in 
detail have been placed in the docket for today's NPRM (Docket No. 
18865) and in Docket No. 17694. The specifications for the proposed 
SID-IIsFRG consist of: (a) A drawing package containing all of the 
technical details of the dummy; (b) a parts list; and (c) a manual 
containing procedures for assembly, disassembly, and inspection (PADI) 
of dummy components. These materials have been placed in Docket No. 
18865. These drawings and specifications ensure that the dummies are 
uniform in design and construction. The certification tests proposed in 
this NPRM would assure that the dummy responses are within the 
established qualification corridors and further validate the uniformity 
of dummy assembly, structural integrity, and adequacy of 
instrumentation. As a result, the repeatability and reproducibility of 
the dummy's performance in dynamic testing would be ensured.
    Drawings and specifications for the SID-IIsFRG are available for 
examination in the NHTSA docket section. Copies of those materials and 
the user manual may also be obtained from Leet-Melbrook, Division of 
New RT, 18810 Woodfield Road, Gaithersburg, MD 20879, tel. (301) 670-
0090.
    Anthropometry and mass of the SID-IIsFRG are based on the Hybrid 
III 5th percentile frontal female dummy and also generally match the 
size and weight of a 12- to 13-year-old child. The head and neck 
designs are based on the Hybrid III 5th percentile female dummy. The 
legs are Hybrid III 5th percentile female design available also with 
femur load cell instrumentation.
    At the same time, the dummy's torso construction is distinctly 
different from other Hybrid III series of dummies as the SID-IIsFRG 
design is particularly oriented for assessing the potential for side 
impact injury. The dummy's upper torso is made up of a rigid metallic 
spine to which six steel bands lined with bonded polymer damping 
material are attached to simulate the impact performance of the human 
shoulder (1 rib), thorax (3 ribs) and abdomen (2 ribs). Linear 
potentiometers are attached from the ribs to the spine for compression 
measurements. Provisions are available for mounting tri-axial 
accelerometer packs to the spine at T1 and T12 
and at each rib.\6\ Replaceable foam pads are secured directly to the 
ribs and a neoprene jacket covers the complete chest assembly. The 
upper torso accommodates the attachment of the neck at the upper end 
and the lumbar spine at the lower end.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ T1--sensor location on the dummy's thoracic spine 
equivalent to the first cervical on the human thoracic spine. 
T12--sensor location on the dummy's thoracic spine 
equivalent to the 12th cervical on the human thoracic spine.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    A stub arm on the impacted side is attached to the lateral aspect 
of the shoulder through a three-axis load cell. Tri-axial accelerometer 
packs can also be installed at the shoulder and at the upper and lower 
parts of the stub arm for side airbag inflation injury assessment.
    The dummy's pelvis is a machined assembly with detachable hard 
urethane iliac wings at each side and covered by vinyl flesh. The 
pelvis design is shaped in a seated human-like posture and allows the 
attachment of the lumbar spine at its top and the legs at the left and 
right sides. The pelvis can be impacted from either side without any 
change in hardware. Replaceable foam crush plugs at the hip joint are 
used to control the lateral pelvis response. The pelvis design allows 
the measurement of impact loads at the acetabulum and iliac wing as 
well as accelerations at the pelvis center of gravity (c.g.).
    The external dimension and assembly weight of the SID-IIsFRG are 
shown in Table 3 below. Additional dimensional information may be found 
in the September 2004 Technical Drawings and Specification package in 
Docket No. 18865.

[[Page 70950]]



                      Table 3.--External Dimensions and Assembly Weights of the SID-IIsFRG
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                      External dimensions                                       Assembly weights
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Dimension                   (in)         (cm)           Segment mass           (lb)         (kg)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Erect Sitting Height...............         31.0         78.7   Head..................         8.16         3.71
Chest Circumference w/Jacket.......         34.5         87.6   Neck..................         2.00         0.91
Chest Depth........................          8.0         20.3   Upper Torso...........        26.10        11.86
Shoulder Width.....................         13.6         34.5   Lower Torso...........        26.82        12.19
H-Point Height.....................          3.4          8.6   Stub Arm..............         2.00         0.91
Buttock Popliteal Length...........         16.9         42.9   Upper Legs............        13.80         6.26
Buttock to Knee Length.............         20.8         52.7   Lower Legs/Feet.......        17.90         8.12
                                                                                       --------------
Knee to Floor Height...............         15.8         40.1    Total................        96.78        43.90
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The SID-IIsFRG is instrumented to assess injury to the head, neck, 
shoulder, thorax, abdomen, pelvis, stub arm and lower extremities. A 
complete list of the instrumentation available for this dummy is shown 
in drawing 180-0000, sheet 3 of 6. Table 3--External Dimensions and 
Assembly.

IV. Biofidelity

    Biofidelity is a measure of how well a test device duplicates the 
responses of a human in an impact. Two methods are currently available 
for assessing the biofidelity of a dummy in side impact testing. The 
first is a procedure of the International Organization of 
Standardization (ISO), referred to as the ISO TR 9790 methodology 
(Irwin et al., ``Guidelines for Assessing the Biofidelity of Side 
Impact Dummies of Various Sizes and Ages,'' 2002 Stapp Car Crash 
Journal, Vol. 46, 2002-22-0016). It determines the biofidelity 
of a dummy by how well the dummy's body segment and/or subsystem impact 
responses replicate cadaver responses in defined impact environments. 
The second is the Biofidelity Ranking System developed by NHTSA (Rhule 
H., et al., 2002 Stapp Car Crash Journal, Vol. 46, p. 477, 
``Development of a New Biofidelity Ranking System for Anthropomorphic 
Test Devices''). The SID-IIsFRG was evaluated by both methods.

Assessment of the SID-IIsFRG by the ISO Biofidelity Classification 
System

    The biofidelity requirements defined in ISO TR 9790 are based on 
two types of head drop tests, three types of lateral neck bending 
tests, four types of shoulder impact tests, six types of lateral 
thoracic tests, five abdominal test conditions and thirteen lateral 
pelvis impact tests. The measured response values are assessed on their 
fit to the established cadaver response corridors. A value of 10 is 
given if the dummy's segment response is completely within the 
boundaries of the cadaver response corridor. A value of 5 is given if 
the most important portion of the dummy's segment response lies within 
one corridor width outside of the specified performance boundaries and 
in others, such as for unusually complex shapes of response curves, by 
group judgment of a group of biomechanical experts on the fit of the 
data. A value of zero is given if neither of the above conditions is 
met.
    The overall dummy's biofidelity is found by weighted average of the 
scores of different body regions. Five classifications indicate the 
degree of biofidelity of the overall dummy rating. A dummy with a 
rating above 8.6 is classified as excellent, 6.5 to 8.6 as good, 4.4 to 
6.5 as fair, 2.6 to 4.4 as marginal, and below 2.6 as unacceptable.
    The ISO methodology was used by OSRP members to evaluate the SID-
IIsFRG in September 2004 (``Technical Summary of OSRP-SIDIIs Upgrade,'' 
September 2004). A copy of the document is in the docket for this NPRM. 
As shown in Table 4, the SID-IIsFRG received an ISO Biofidelity rating 
of 5.9, which corresponds to a ``fair'' classification. Scherer et al. 
had rated the SID-IIs Beta Prototype dummy a rating of 7.0, placing it 
in the ISO classification of ``good.''\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ Scherer, et al., ``SID IIs Beta+-Prototype Dummy 
Biomechanical Responses,'' 1998, SAE 983151.

     Table 4.--Summary of ISO Biofidelity for SID-IIs and SID-IIsFRG
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                    ISO Biofidelity
                                                    Classification
                Body Segment                 ---------------------------
                                                 SID-IIs     SID-IIsFRG
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Head........................................           7.5           7.5
Neck........................................           5.2           4.8
Shoulder....................................           6.2           5.1
Thorax......................................           7.8           6.5
Abdomen.....................................           8.8           5.7
Pelvis......................................           5.7           5.3
Overall.....................................           7.0           5.9
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The OSRP-developed ISO ratings for the SID-IIs and SID-IIsFRG 
dummies compare favorably with other side impact dummies. The overall 
ES-2re \8\ dummy's biofidelity rating was determined to be 4.6, while 
the SID (49 CFR Part 572 Subpart M) and EuroSID-1 dummies received 
ratings of 2.3 and 4.4,\9\ respectively. The SID-HIII received an 
overall rating of 3.8 (63 FR 41468).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ The ES-2re dummy is a 50th percentile European designed 
adult male side impact crash test dummy that the agency has proposed 
to use in the proposed upgrade of FMVSS No. 214 (69 FR 27990, 
supra).
    \9\ Byrnes, et al., ``ES-2 Dummy Biomechanical Responses,'' 
2002, Stapp Car Crash Journal, Vol. 46, 2002-22-0014, p. 
353.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Assessment by the NHTSA Biofidelity Ranking System

    The NHTSA method of evaluating the biofidelity of a dummy 
determines the biofidelity based on two assessment measures: (a) The 
ability of a dummy to load the relevant contact surfaces as a cadaver 
does (termed ``External Biofidelity''); and (b) the ability of a dummy 
to replicate those cadaver responses that best predict injury potential 
(``Internal Biofidelity''). This ranking system evaluates the dummy's 
ability to replicate the cadaver loading responses at the whole body 
level, and how that body replicates the loading of interfacing external 
structures.
    Similar to the ISO TR 9790 biofidelity rating system, the NHTSA 
ranking system is based on a comparison between cadaver and dummy 
responses in head drop tests, thorax and shoulder pendulum tests, and 
whole body sled tests including abdominal and pelvic offset test 
conditions. Each test condition is assigned a weighting factor, based 
on the number of human subjects tested, to form a biomechanical 
response corridor and the relevance of the biofidelity test to the 
intended test environment. For each response requirement, the 
cumulative variance of the dummy response relative to the

[[Page 70951]]

mean cadaver response (DCV), and the cumulative variance of the mean 
cadaver response relative to the mean plus one standard deviation (CCV) 
are calculated. The ratio of DCV/CCV expresses how well the dummy 
response duplicates the mean cadaver response. A smaller ratio 
indicates better biofidelity.
    Although this method does not establish an ``absolute'' ranking 
scale, the ranks provide a relative sense of the ``number of standard 
deviations'' the dummy's responses are away from the mean human 
response. If the dummy biofidelity ranking is below two, the dummy is 
behaving similar to the human cadaver. The evaluation methodology 
provides a comparison of both dummy response to cadaver response as 
well as a comparison of two or more dummies.

Comparison Between SID-IIsFRG, ES-2re and SID-HIII Dummies

    Tables 5 and 6 were constructed to provide a comparison of external 
and internal biofidelities between the SID-IIsFRG, the ES-2re and the 
SID-HIII (Part 572 Subpart M) 50th percentile male side impact 
dummies.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ The SID-IIsFRG and the ES-2re ranks were calculated 
primarily on data from sled tests at the Medical College of 
Wisconsin and impactor tests at VRTC. The SID-HIII rankings were 
calculated based on data obtained in VRTC tests.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The data in Table 5 indicate that the SIDIIsFRG dummy has 
comparable Overall External Biofidelity with the ES-2re dummy and has 
better biofidelity than the SID-HIII dummy. At the body segment level, 
the SID-IIsFRG produces better External Biofidelity ranks than the ES-
2re in the Head/Neck, Thorax and Abdomen and worse ranks than the ES-
2re in the Shoulder and Pelvis. The SID-IIsFRG produces better External 
Biofidelity ranks than the SID-HIII in all body regions except the 
Head/Neck.

                                      Table 5.--External Biofidelity ranks
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                      External biofidelity                          SID-IIs FRG       ES-2re         SID-HIII
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Overall Rank....................................................             2.5             2.6             3.8
Head/Neck Rank..................................................             1.8             3.7             1.0
Shoulder Rank...................................................             2.6             1.4             5.1
Thorax Rank.....................................................             2.8             2.9             6.1
Abdomen Rank....................................................             2.4             2.6             3.0
Pelvis Rank.....................................................             3.0             2.7             3.8
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Table 6 provides a comparison of the Internal Biofidelity ranks of 
the three dummies. The data indicate that the SID-IIsFRG Overall 
Biofidelity rank is better than those of the two 50th percentile male 
dummies, both with and without the abdomen being included in the 
biofidelity ranking calculations. All body region Internal Biofidelity 
ranks of the SID-IIsFRG are better than, or comparable to, those of the 
ES-2re and SID-HIII.

                                      Table 6.--Internal Biofidelity Ranks
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                      Internal biofidelity                         SID-IIs (FRG)      ES-2re         SID-HIII
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Overall Rank with abdomen.......................................             1.5             n/a             n/a
Overall Rank without abdomen....................................             1.3             1.6             1.9
Head Rank.......................................................             0.4             1.0             1.1
Thorax Rank.....................................................         \1\ 1.8         \1\ 1.9         \2\ 2.2
Abdomen Rank....................................................             2.0             n/a             n/a
Pelvis Rank.....................................................         \3\ 1.6         \3\ 2.0        \3\ 2.5
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
n/a--Not applicable.
\1\ Rib defl & T-12 lat accel.
\2\ TTI.
\3\ Pelvis lateral acceleration.

    Based on the Overall External and Internal Biofidelity ranks, the 
SID-IIsFRG and the ES-2re dummies were found to be nearly equivalent 
and are lower than the SID-HIII dummy.\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ As noted in the Technical Report for the SID-IIsFRG, NHTSA 
also compared the biofidelities of the SID-IIs and the SID-IIsFRG by 
the NHTSA method and found that the dummy responses are 
substantially comparable to the mean cadaver responses and to each 
other.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Based on the information from the biofidelity assessment, the 
agency tentatively concludes that the SID-IIsFRG is well suited for 
assessing the risk of injury to the small size occupant segment.

V. Repeatability and Reproducibility

    A dummy's repeatability and reproducibility analysis is typically 
based on component tests and a series of sled tests. In the tests, the 
impact input is carefully controlled to minimize the variability of 
external effects on the dummy's response. Component tests are better 
controlled, and thus produce more reliable estimates of the dummy's 
repeatability and reproducibility than is possible in sled and vehicle 
tests. Component tests are also needed to certify the dummy's 
performance relative to the established response corridors for each 
major body segment. That is, if the dummy's component is or becomes 
deficient, the certification test will identify to the user that the 
component will not respond properly in impact tests, and that a 
replacement of parts should precede further testing. Sled tests, on the 
other hand, offer a method of efficiently evaluating the dummy as a 
complete system in an environment much like a vehicle test. Sled tests 
are needed to establish the consistency of the dummy's kinematics, its 
impact response as an assembly, and the integrity of the dummy's 
structure and instrumentation under controlled and representative crash 
environment test conditions.
    Two SID-IIsFRG dummies were tested and exposed to both component

[[Page 70952]]

and sled test conditions multiple times to determine the dummy's 
ability to respond consistently. The evaluation of the SID-IIsFRG 
during these tests is described in the following technical reports: 
``Repeatability and Reproducibility Analysis of the SID-IIsFRG Dummy in 
the Sled Test Environment,'' February 2004; and ``Repeatability and 
Reproducibility Analysis of the SID-IIsFRG Dummy in the Certification 
Test Environment,'' March 2004 (see NHTSA Docket No. 17694) and 
``Summary of the NHTSA Evaluation of the SID-IIsFRG Side Impact Crash 
Test Dummy Including Assessment of Durability, Biofidelity, 
Repeatability, Reproducibility and Directional Sensitivity'' (Docket 
No. 18865). The following discussion summarizes the finding of these 
reports.

a. Component Tests

    Component tests were conducted on head, neck, shoulder, thorax with 
arm, thorax without arm, abdomen, and pelvis body regions. The tests 
are described in Section X of this preamble, ``Proposed certification 
tests.'' The repeatability assessment was made using Coefficient of 
Variation (CV) in percentage as a measure. A CV value of less than 5 
percent is considered excellent, 5-8 percent good, 8-10 percent 
acceptable, and above 10 percent unacceptable.\12\ The reproducibility 
was established by comparing the percent CV of two different dummies' 
combined responses.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ ISO/TC22/SC12/WG5.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The results of the component repeatability tests indicate 
``excellent'' repeatability for the SID-IIsFRG dummy for all components 
except for the thorax with arm, which has a ``good'' rating.
    The results of the component tests generally indicated 
``excellent'' to ``good'' reproducibility for the dummy for all 
components. The pelvis lateral acceleration was the only elevated 
reproducibility response at a CV of 9.1 (``acceptable''). The agency 
believes that some of this elevated variability was due to inconsistent 
force-deflection characteristics of the pelvis plug. As described in 
Section VI of this preamble, we believe that the variability of the 
pelvis lateral acceleration can be improved by incorporating force-
deflection limits for the pelvis plug into the specifications for the 
test dummy. Today's NPRM proposes such performance requirements in 
Section VI of this preamble.

b. Sled Tests

    The sled tests were conducted on a Hyge-type sled system, on which 
a bench seat and impact load wall were mounted. During the test, the 
SID-IIsFRG slid down the bench seat and impacted the rigid load wall. 
The first set of tests was conducted with a flat load wall at 6.7 
meters/second (m/s). The selected impact speed reflected one of the 
impact environments in agency-sponsored PMHS (post-mortem human 
subject) tests that provided a partial basis for the development of 
biomechanical performance corridors. However, in this test series, the 
shoulder rib was found to have bottomed out against the rib stops.
    In order to produce a more suitable test condition in the range of 
intensity that would be expected in a crash test, the sled speed was 
reduced and a second series of three tests was conducted (with a flat 
wall) at 6.0 m/s. The dummy's arm was positioned down in these flat 
wall tests. The third series of tests was also conducted at 6.0 m/s 
with a 101 mm abdomen offset block on the load wall (``abdominal offset 
tests''), and with the dummy's arm in the up orientation. The 101 mm 
offset block was oriented such that it would impact the abdomen only, 
above the pelvis and below the lower thoracic rib. The objective of the 
abdomen offset tests was to provide a test environment with severe 
loading of the abdominal region.
1. 6.7 m/s Flat Wall Test Results
    Generally the responses in the 6.7 m/s flat wall sled tests 
displayed either excellent or good repeatability in all measurements, 
except for concerns that the SID-IIsFRG dummy's shoulder rib was at or 
very close to reaching the maximum available displacement.\13\ The SID-
IIsFRG dummies also generally demonstrated excellent or good 
reproducibility for measurements proposed for incorporation into FMVSS 
No. 214 (69 FR 27990, supra).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ Because the shoulder rib almost always reached maximum 
stroke and contacted the rib stops in this 6.7 m/s test, the agency 
did not assess the repeatability or reproducibility of the upper 
spine (T1) acceleration measurements or the shoulder rib 
deflection in this test.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. 6.0 m/s Flat Wall Test Results
    The dummies exhibited overall excellent or good repeatability in 
all injury indicating measurements in this test series. However, the 
resultant pelvis acceleration of dummy serial number (S/N) 56 
had a marginally unacceptable CV of = 10.9%. NHTSA notes that the CV 
for resultant pelvis acceleration was calculated using the highest peak 
value within the data trace, which could be either the first or the 
second peak. NHTSA believes that the magnitude of the peak, and whether 
it was the first or the second peak during the impact, was determined 
by the stiffness characteristic of the pelvis plugs used in the tests. 
An excessively stiff plug would be the cause for high first peaks 
usually occurring within the first 5 ms in certification tests, while a 
softer plug would favor the predominance of a higher second peak, 
occurring in the latter part of the impact event, that is later than 5 
ms from time of impact. The agency believes that the performance 
requirements specified in today's document for the pelvis plug will 
prevent use of excessively stiff plugs, and that softer plugs will 
result in a more consistent pelvis response measurement.
3. Abdominal Offset Tests
    The dummies demonstrated excellent or good repeatability and 
reproducibility in all of the abdominal offset test measurements, 
except that the CV of the peak resultant pelvis acceleration for one of 
the dummies was 10.5%. NHTSA believes that the elevated CV was due to 
the variability of the pelvis plug response.
    Based on the testing of the SID-IIsFRG dummy, the agency 
tentatively concludes that the repeatability and reproducibility of the 
SID-IIsFRG's responses establishes the suitability for use in the 
agency's side impact test programs.

VI. Pelvis Plug

    The stiffness limits of the pelvis plug proposed in this NPRM 
affect mostly the peak pelvic acceleration, peak acetabulum force, and 
peak iliac force levels of the dummy, as well as the maximum force 
measured by the impacting pendulum. In the pelvis certification test of 
the dummy, the pendulum impact probe is centered on the pelvis plug 
that is mounted within the pelvis flesh cavity in front of and in line 
with the acetabulum load cell's longitudinal axis either at the right 
or left H-points of the dummy (depending on the side of the dummy to be 
impacted). The original recommended practice was to require that the 
pelvis plug be discarded after each impact.
    In agency testing, NHTSA observed that some of the data traces of 
the dummy's pelvis acceleration showed an inconsistent first peak in 
the data trace that was generated by the probe's impact. (``Summary of 
the NHTSA Evaluation of the SID-IIsFRG Side Impact Crash Test Dummy 
Including Assessment of Durability, Biofidelity, Repeatability, 
Reproducibility and Directional Sensitivity'' (November 2004), supra.) 
Agency evaluation showed that the inconsistency of the

[[Page 70953]]

first peak acceleration response was caused by variability of the crush 
characteristics of the pelvis plugs (i.e., variability of the 
resistance force during compression) rather than by other 
characteristics of the dummy. The plug as originally specified for the 
SID-IIs provided practically no control over its stiffness 
characteristics.
    Agency evaluation indicated that control of the crush 
characteristics of the pelvis plug would significantly improve the 
consistency of all of the dummy's pelvis responses as well as the force 
values measured by the impact probe. Based on an evaluation of plugs 
with a variety of force deflection characteristics, NHTSA has developed 
a force-displacement corridor for the pelvis plug that assures less 
variability of the pelvis acceleration response. As a result, a test 
procedure was developed for measuring the force-displacement 
characteristics of the plugs. The proposed procedure evaluates a plug 
by quasi-statically compressing it to a deflection range between 22 and 
25 mm and a corresponding resistance force between 1920 and 2160 
Newtons (N) at minimum compression and 2000 to 2240 N at maximum 
compression.\14\ (See Drawing--Plug Pelvis 180-4450.) \15\ 
Only plugs that meet the specified force levels at prescribed 
compression would be certified for use in a side impact test using the 
dummy.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ The proposed values may slightly change for purposes of a 
final rule as new data on plug deformation characteristics become 
available.
    \15\ The procedure and proposed force-displacement requirements 
are specified on this drawing for the pelvis plug, which is part of 
the drawing package for the SID-IIsFRG dummy.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    A plug is certified after passing the compression test. The agency 
anticipates that users may either purchase the plugs commercially or 
certify the plugs themselves. For pelvis calibration, the certified 
plug is inserted into the pelvis cavity of the dummy and the dummy's 
pelvis is calibrated according to the proposed Part 572 test procedure. 
It should be noted that the pelvis plugs can only be used once per 
either vehicle crash test or pelvis certification application. After 
the dummy's pelvis is calibrated, the plug must be discarded. A new 
certified plug is inserted into the pelvis cavity of the dummy for 
every crash test incorporating the SID-IIsFRG. Carefully controlled and 
certified crush characteristics of the plugs will assure that their use 
will produce consistent and reliable pelvis response in the impact 
environment.

VII. Durability

    NHTSA examined the durability of the SID-IIs dummy in the context 
of the potential use of the dummy for regulatory purposes. In testing 
under FMVSS compliance and NHTSA's consumer information programs, test 
dummies are exposed to a wide range of side crash conditions. They may 
be tested with vehicles with highly advanced crashworthiness 
technologies and with vehicles that lack adequate structure and/or 
features that effectively mitigate the crash forces. A crash test dummy 
has to have sufficient durability to maintain its structural integrity 
and measurement ability throughout this range of potential test 
conditions.

Background

    The agency's assessment of the SID-IIs began with an evaluation of 
the dynamic performance of the dummy in sled tests conducted at 8.9 m/s 
and 6.7 m/s with various impact surfaces.\16\ These test velocities 
were chosen to replicate agency-sponsored PMHS impacts in sled tests 
involving 8.9 m/s and 6.7 m/s changes in velocity.\17\ Those NHTSA PMHS 
tests had approximated some of the biomechanical tests performed in the 
1980s and 1990s by Wayne State University, University of Michigan 
Transportation Research Institute and others that were used to develop 
the ISO 9790 impact response corridors for assessing the biofidelity of 
test dummies.\18\ The biomechanical data from the PMHS tests enabled 
NHTSA to develop the injury criteria that would predict the risk of 
injury in side impact crashes.\19\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ See ``Development of the SID-IIs FRG,'' supra.
    \17\ Maltese et al., ``Response Corridors of Human Surrogates in 
Lateral Impacts,'' Technical Paper 2002-22-0017, Proceedings, 46th 
Stapp Car Crash Conference.
    \18\ ISO/TC 22/SC 12/WG 5, document 645.
    \19\ Among other findings, NHTSA determined that the SID-IIs 
dummy, experiencing thoracic rib deflections of 41 mm, would predict 
a 25% probability of AIS 4+thorax injury, and at 56 mm of rib 
deflection, a 50% probability of AIS 4+ injury. Further, an 
abdominal deflection of 59 mm produces a 25 % of risk of AIS4+, and 
at 67 mm, a 50% probability of AIS 4+ abdominal injury. ``Injury 
Criteria for Side Impact Dummies'' (NHTSA docket 17694-12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    One finding of the sled tests was that the 8.9 m/s test was too 
severe to assess the durability and other characteristics of the dummy. 
Impact tests of the SID-IIs dummy into a 4-inch padded 103 kPa flat 
wall at 8.9 m/s indicated abdominal rib deflections as high as 62 mm. 
Impacts into a 3-inch 400 kPa padded flat wall at 8.9 m/s produced 
abdominal rib deflections bordering 70 mm, including an indication of 
flat topping. (Flat topping is an indication that the dummy's rib 
deflection mechanism is either binding or reaching the end of the 
available stroke, and consequently, the dummy's abdomen is not 
responding correctly to the load from the intruding side structure. 
When flat topping occurs, the potentiometer ceases to produce useful 
deflection measurements, and in some instances experiences physical 
damage.) Some of these abdominal deflections were in excess of 
predicting a probability of a 50% risk of AIS 4+ abdominal injury.
    On the other hand, NHTSA found that the 6.7 m/s sled test was more 
appropriate for evaluating the durability of the dummy. Sled impacts 
into a padded wall at 6.7 m/s yielded maximum abdominal rib deflections 
of approximately 45 mm with 103 kPa padding and 61 mm with 400 kPa 
padding. Inasmuch as the 61 mm abdominal rib deflection was just above 
the 25% probability of AIS 4+ injury level and the deflection data 
trace contained no indication of flat topping or other signal 
irregularities, the 6.7 m/s impact speed was selected as an impact 
intensity that the dummy must withstand without structural damage and 
instrumentation failures.\20\ The SID-IIs did not show durability 
problems in the 6.7 m/s sled tests into a padded wall.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \20\ The durability tests were conducted at 6.7 m/s, whereas the 
tests assessing the repeatability and reproducibility of the dummy 
were conducted at 6.0 m/s. The 6.0 m/s test speed was appropriate 
for assessing the dummy's repeatability and reproducibility because 
tests at that velocity produce dummy responses that are seen in 
crash tests, and approach the limits of the injury criteria 
associated with the dummy at a 25% of AIS 4+ injury. Durability 
tests are conducted at a higher velocity to ``overload'' the dummy, 
to subject it to conditions that could give rise to possible 
durability problems in automotive crash test environments.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Follow On Tests

    Follow on tests, however, indicated a possible durability problem 
with the SID-IIs in 6.7 m/s sled tests using a rigid wall with a 101 mm 
abdominal offset. The agency conducted the tests to replicate 
biomechanical sled test impact configurations previously reported by 
Maltese et al. (``Response Corridors of Human Surrogates in Lateral 
Impacts,'' supra). These abdominal offset tests significantly damaged 
the dummy. Damage in some of the tests included deformed abdominal 
ribs, bent abdominal potentiometer shafts, and/or gouged damping 
material. Further analysis of the sled tests and pendulum tests with 
the SID-IIs suggested that either vertical motion of the ribs and/or 
excessive rib compression caused the damage to the ribs and the 
potentiometers.

[[Page 70954]]

    These failures prompted NHTSA's Vehicle Research and Test Center to 
search for ways to improve the abdominal rib response through a 
redesign of the existing SID-IIs rib guides, including subsequent 
introduction of floating rib guides. The agency wanted to make certain 
that the SID-IIs dummy was sufficiently robust and durable in all 
foreseeable impact environments. Modifications of the SID-IIs dummy 
leading to the SID-IIsFRG design are discussed in Section IIb of this 
preamble. The FRG design modifications have prevented damage to the 
dummy even under very severe loading conditions. Three test series are 
summarized below.
    In the first series, NHTSA conducted two sets of seven 6.7 m/s sled 
tests to evaluate the durability of the SID-IIsFRG. They included rigid 
wall thorax and rigid 101 mm abdomen offset impact configurations. In 
contrast to previous testing of an unmodified SID-IIs dummy to these 
test configurations, the SID-IIsFRG experienced no damage either to the 
potentiometers or any of the thoracic and abdominal ribs. There were no 
losses of or discontinuities in the potentiometer data signals. 
(``Development of the SID-IIs FRG,'' Section 7.3, supra. Other 
durability tests are also discussed in this report.)
    In another series evaluating the FRG design, the agency tested the 
durability of the FRG revised shoulder rib (containing a wider rib 
damping material area) and redesigned shoulder rib guide. An out-of-
position side air bag test in the passenger side of a 2000 BMW 528i was 
selected because that test had resulted in damage to both the shoulder 
rib and shoulder potentiometer of an unmodified SID-IIs. In the tests, 
the dummy was positioned directly against the side air bag, as outlined 
by the Technical Working Group (Lund, A., Chairman of the Side Air Bag 
Out-of-Position Injury Technical Working Group, ``Recommended 
Procedures for Evaluating Occupant Injury Risk from Deploying Side 
Airbags,'' August 2000). The test conditions allowed the side air bag 
to contact the thoracic and abdominal ribs with an upward component. In 
these tests, the SID-IIsFRG had none of the damage to the shoulder rib 
and shoulder potentiometer that was observed in the unmodified SID-IIs. 
The shoulder rib guide design prevented the rib from jumping out of the 
rib guide, thus eliminating permanent rib distortion and damaging the 
potentiometer. ``Development of the SID-IIs FRG,'' Section 7.4.
    In a third series of durability pendulum tests, rigidly fixed 
thoraxes of the unmodified SID-IIs and the SID-IIsFRG, with their 
jackets off, were tested in a perpendicular, 15 degree upward impact 
configuration at a velocity of 2.84 m/s (6.4 miles per hour). When 
subjected to a localized pendulum impact centered on 2 
thoracic rib, the potentiometer shafts of the unmodified SID-IIs bent, 
and potentiometer bushings pulled out of the potentiometer bearing 
assemblies. Id., Section 7.9. In contrast, the SID-IIsFRG potentiometer 
measured rib deflections while sustaining no structural damage.
    In sum, the FRG design has significantly improved the durability of 
the SID-IIs dummy and made it useful for the assessment of risk injury 
in the most severe automotive impact environments.\21\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \21\ There are other views as to the need for the improvements 
to the SID-IIs. Comments to the May 17, 2004, NPRM on FMVSS No. 214 
can be viewed in NHTSA Docket 17694.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

VIII. Reversibility for Right and Left Use

    The SID-IIsFRG is designed to have equivalent performance when 
impacted from either the left or right side. However, most agency tests 
have been left side impacts. To convert the dummy's impact side from 
left to right side and vice versa, the entire dummy's thorax, abdomen, 
and shoulder structure, upon disengagement of the neck and of the 
lumbar spine at the lower torso interfaces, is rotated as a unit around 
the vertical axis with respect to the neck and the lumbar spine without 
any further modifications. Limited agency testing of the dummy 
converted from left to right side impact indicated complete compliance 
to the calibration corridors, except for the head response being below 
the lower calibration limit by 1g. The agency does not believe this to 
be a problem, since the head used in this test was a single test of a 
dummy build with consideration for only left side impact. Once the 
calibration specifications are proposed for right and left side 
impacts, the vehicle manufacturers should have no problem manufacturing 
the heads complying to the calibration specifications for both right 
and left side impacts.
    The method for reversing the dummy for use in either left-or right-
side impacts is discussed in the PADI document for the SID-IIsFRG 
dummy.

IX. Directional Impact Sensitivity

    Limited NHTSA tests indicate that the SID-IIsFRG dummy's thoracic 
and abdominal rib deflection and upper spine (T01) and lower 
spine (T12) acceleration measurements exhibit a degree of 
directional sensitivity depending on pendulum impact angle and 
velocity. The agency conducted pendulum oblique impact tests at 4.3 m/s 
on the dummy's shoulder, thorax, and abdomen. Tests were conducted on 
the SID-IIsFRG at 4.3 m/s with the dummy's midsagittal plane oriented 
perpendicular to the trajectory of the impact probe, and at an oblique 
frontal angle of +30 degrees, +15 degrees and at -15 degrees posterior 
to the lateral plane of the dummy. The dummy in those tests measured 
reduced shoulder, thoracic and abdominal rib deflections in the +30 and 
+15 degrees oblique impacts when compared to pure lateral impacts. The 
thoracic reduction ratios were 0.78 and 0.79 for oblique angles of +15 
and -15 degrees. Similar reduction ratios in deflection are experienced 
in abdominal and shoulder impacts tests in +30 degree impacts, but the 
ratios reduce as the angle decreases to +15 degrees. The SID-IIsFRG 
dummy's peak Y (lateral) acceleration of the upper spine and lower 
spines in 4.3 m/s oblique impacts show lower levels of directional 
sensitivity as compared to the deflection measurements, except for the 
elevated ratios of the upper spine in abdominal impact at +15 degrees 
(1.27) and higher ratios of lower spine (3.22) and upper spine (2.20) 
accelerations in +30 degree impacts.
    To NHTSA's knowledge, biomechanical data on whether and the degree 
to which human cadavers experience directional sensitivity in oblique 
impacts do not exist. It is unknown how the dummy's directional 
sensitivity relates to the human experience.
    While the pendulum tests show that directional sensitivity of the 
dummy's ribcage exists, the directional sensitivity of the SID-IIsFRG 
in +15 and -15 degree impacts appears comparable to those of other side 
impact dummies. Further, the loading of the dummy in the pendulum tests 
is unlike the loading experienced in a vehicle crash test. The pendulum 
has a small and rigid impact face and a relatively small mass that is 
intended to load a specific localized region of the dummy. In contrast, 
in a vehicle crash test, an intruding vehicle structure loads the dummy 
in multiple areas during a collision. The intruding area is usually 
fairly large, is typically energy absorbing, and changes its 
configuration and force of impact direction during the crash. The 
agency is not aware of vehicle crash test data that provides evidence 
of consistent increases or decreases in the dummy responses due to 
oblique loading. Accordingly, while the pendulum tests indicate that 
the dummy has some

[[Page 70955]]

sensitivity to impact direction, this finding has not been established 
as being relevant to loading conditions in vehicle tests.

X. Proposed Calibration Tests

    The proposed calibration procedures in general follow the test 
conditions and specifications contained in FTSS's document, ``SID-IIs 
Small Side Impact Crash Test Dummy User's Manual,'' February 2002. 
NHTSA used this document as a basis because of FTSS involvement with 
OSRP in the design and development of the dummy.

Head Drop Test Specifications

    The head is dropped from 200 mm onto a flat, rigid steel plate such 
that the midsagittal plane of the head makes a 35 degree angle with 
respect to the impact surface while the head's anterior-posterior axis 
remains horizontal. When the dummy head is dropped in accordance with 
the above test conditions, the resultant acceleration of the center of 
gravity of the head must be between 125 and 145 g's. This proposed 
corridor is narrower than that specified by FTSS for this dummy (115-
145 g's). The NHTSA data base, consisting of two heads dropped in a 
series five impacts each, indicated that the SID-IIsFRG head is capable 
of meeting the narrower limits.

Neck Pendulum Test

    The proposed test procedure involves attaching the dummy's neck-
headform assembly to a pendulum fixture. The pendulum is raised to a 
height from which it falls to achieve a velocity of 5.57  
0.06 m/s at the instant the pendulum hits the hexcell deceleration 
block. Based on tests of two neck-headform assemblies, the agency 
determined that the neck would limit the headform lateral flexion-
rotation between 74 and 79 degrees, and the resistance moment about the 
occipital condyle from -40 to -45 N-m compared to 72-82 degrees and 
maximum moment of -36 to -43 N-m suggested in the FTSS user manual.

Thorax

    The dummy's thoracic response is ascertained by testing the thorax 
with the arm and the thorax without the arm. In the tests, the dummy is 
seated on a specified bench seat. The thorax with arm test calls for 
the dummy's arm being oriented downward to the lowest detent. A 
pendulum impactor is guided so as to strike the dummy's arm at 6.7 m/s 
at the midpoint level of the second rib. The dummy's shoulder rib as 
well as its upper, middle and lower thorax ribs would have to meet 
deflection limits of 28-34 mm, 23-28 mm, 28-33 mm; and 31-36 mm, 
respectively. In addition, the peak accelerations would have to be 40 
to 46 g's at the upper spine (T1) and 37 to 41 g's at the 
lower spine (T12). FTSS suggests in its SID-IIs user manual 
deflection limits for the upper rib of 24-32 mm, for middle rib 26-42 
mm, and for the lower rib 34-42 mm, and for accelerations the limits of 
35-50 g's for the upper and 22-48 g's for the lower spines. However, 
while the FTSS suggested limits in general are broader in range they 
are not directly comparable to the SID-IIsFRG dummy performance values, 
because of differences in the thorax and shoulder designs between the 
two dummy types.
    The test of the thorax without the dummy's arm is conducted in the 
same way as the thorax with arm test, except that the stub arm is 
removed and the impact by the pendulum is at 4.3 m/s. The upper, middle 
and lower ribs would have to meet the deflection limits of 33 to 39 mm, 
38 to 43 mm, and 33-39 mm, respectively, as well as limit the peak 
acceleration of the upper (T1) spine between 14 and 18 g's 
and the lower (T12) spine between 8 and 12 g's. FTSS 
suggested limits for SID-IIs upper rib deflection is 30-44 mm, for the 
middle rib 42-58 mm, and for the lower rib 36-52 mm, and accelerations 
the limits of 13-19 g's for the upper and 8-12g's for the lower spines. 
As in the thorax test with arms, the FTSS suggested limits in general 
are broader in range. However, they are not directly comparable to the 
SID-IIsFRG dummy performance values because of differences in the 
thorax and shoulder designs between the two dummies.

Abdomen

    The abdomen assembly is part of the upper thorax assembly and is 
represented by two ribs and the deflection sensors. The abdomen test is 
performed on a seated dummy with the dummy's arm removed. When the 
dummy's abdomen is impacted by a pendulum at 4.3 m/s, the deflection of 
each abdominal rib would have to be between 36 and 42 mm, and the peak 
acceleration of the lower spine (T12) laterally oriented 
accelerometer range between 11 g's and 15 g's. FTSS suggested abdominal 
deflection limits are 42-60 mm for the upper and lower abdominal ribs 
and 9.5-12 g's for the lower spine (T12). As in thorax 
tests, the performance limits between the SID-IIS and FRG dummies are 
not directly comparable, because of differences in their abdomen 
designs.

Pelvis

    This test would be performed on a fully assembled, seated dummy 
that has a certified pelvis plug meeting the force deflection 
characteristics specified in the designated pelvis plug drawing (see 
section VI, supra). The dummy pelvis would be impacted laterally by a 
pendulum at a velocity of 6.7  0.1 m/s. Peak acceleration 
of the impactor and of the pelvis would have to be within the limits of 
45 to 49 g's, and 42 and 46 g's, respectively. Peak force responses of 
the acetabulum would have to be between 3882 and 4270 N and peak iliac 
wing force response between 524 and 730 N. Comparable limits suggested 
in the FTSS user manual for the SID-IIs dummy's impactor and pelvis 
accelerations are 38-42 g's and 46-60 g's, respectively. As in thorax 
and abdomen tests, the performance limits between the SID-IIs and FRG 
dummies are not directly comparable, because of differences in the 
pelvis plug specifications.

Shoulder

    A possible shoulder calibration test is described in the FTSS user 
manual, supra. In it, the dummy's shoulder would have to meet 
deflection and acceleration limits. However, the agency tentatively 
believes that a 4.3 m/s calibration test for the shoulder is not 
necessary because the evaluation of the shoulder appears to be achieved 
by the thorax with arm test. Both tests produced nearly identical 
shoulder response values. Comments are requested on this issue.

Rulemaking Analyses and Notices

Executive Order 12866 and DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures

    Executive Order 12866, ``Regulatory Planning and Review'' (58 FR 
51735, October 4, 1993), provides for making determinations whether a 
regulatory action is ``significant'' and therefore subject to Office of 
Management and Budget (OMB) review and to the requirements of the 
Executive Order. The Order defines a ``significant regulatory action'' 
as one that is likely to result in a rule that may:
    (1) Have an annual effect on the economy of $100 million or more or 
adversely affect in a material way the economy, a sector of the 
economy, productivity, competition, jobs, the environment, public 
health or safety, or State, local, or Tribal governments or 
communities;
    (2) Create a serious inconsistency or otherwise interfere with an 
action taken or planned by another agency;

[[Page 70956]]

    (3) Materially alter the budgetary impact of entitlements, grants, 
user fees, or loan programs or the rights and obligations of recipients 
thereof; or
    (4) Raise novel legal or policy issues arising out of legal 
mandates, the President's priorities, or the principles set forth in 
the Executive Order.
    This rulemaking action was not considered a significant regulatory 
action under Executive Order 12866. This rulemaking action was also 
determined not to be significant under the Department of 
Transportation's (DOT's) regulatory policies and procedures (44 FR 
11034, February 26, 1979). This document proposes to amend 49 CFR Part 
572 by adding design and performance specifications for a 5th 
percentile adult female side impact dummy that the agency may use in 
compliance tests of Federal side impact protection standards and other 
related purposes. If this proposed Part 572 rule becomes final, it 
would affect only those businesses that choose to manufacture or test 
with the dummy. It would not impose any requirements on anyone.
    The cost of an uninstrumented SID-IIsFRG is $49,000. 
Instrumentation would add $40,470 as specified for Part 572 and 
compliance purposes. Fully instrumenting the dummy (beyond that 
specified in this notice) could add up to $135,088, if full 
instrumentation were desired by dummy users. Full instrumentation is 
not required by this NPRM. Because the economic impacts of this 
proposal are so minimal, no further regulatory evaluation is necessary.

Regulatory Flexibility Act

    Pursuant to the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq., 
as amended by the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act 
(SBREFA) of 1996), whenever an agency is required to publish a proposed 
or final rule, it must prepare and make available for public comment a 
regulatory flexibility analysis that describes the effect of the rule 
on small entities (i.e., small businesses, small organizations, and 
small governmental jurisdictions), unless the head of the agency 
certifies the rule will not have a significant economic impact on a 
substantial number of small entities. The Small Business 
Administration's regulations at 13 CFR Part 121 define a small 
business, in part, as a business entity ``which operates primarily 
within the United States.'' (13 CFR 121.105(a)).
    We have considered the effects of this rulemaking under the 
Regulatory Flexibility Act. I hereby certify that the proposed 
rulemaking action would not have a significant economic impact on a 
substantial number of small entities. This action would not have a 
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities 
because the addition of the test dummy to Part 572 would not impose any 
requirements on anyone. This rulemaking action by NHTSA does not 
require anyone to manufacture the dummy or to test vehicles with it.

National Environmental Policy Act

    NHTSA has analyzed this proposal for the purposes of the National 
Environmental Policy Act and determined that it will not have any 
significant impact on the quality of the human environment.

Executive Order 13132 (Federalism)

    Executive Order 13132 requires agencies to develop an accountable 
process to ensure ``meaningful and timely input by State and local 
officials in the development of regulatory policies that have 
federalism implications.'' ``Policies that have federalism 
implications'' is defined in the Executive Order to include regulations 
that have ``substantial direct effects on the States, on the 
relationship between the national government and the States, or on the 
distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of 
government.''
    NHTSA has analyzed this proposed amendment in accordance with the 
principles and criteria set forth in Executive Order 13132. The agency 
has determined that this proposal does not have sufficient federalism 
implications to warrant consultation and the preparation of a 
Federalism Assessment.

Civil Justice Reform

    This proposed rule would 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.

Paperwork Reduction Act

    Under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, a person is not required 
to respond to a collection of information by a Federal agency unless 
the collection displays a valid control number from the Office of 
Management and Budget (OMB). This proposed rule would not have any 
requirements that are considered to be information collection 
requirements as defined by the OMB in 5 CFR Part 1320.

National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act

    Section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement 
Act of 1995 (NTTAA), Public Law 104-113, section 12(d) (15 U.S.C. 272) 
directs NHTSA to use voluntary consensus standards in its regulatory 
activities unless doing so would be inconsistent with applicable law or 
otherwise impractical. Voluntary consensus standards are technical 
standards (e.g., materials specifications, test methods, sampling 
procedures, and business practices) that are developed or adopted by 
voluntary consensus standards bodies, such as the Society of Automotive 
Engineers (SAE). The NTTAA directs NHTSA to provide Congress, through 
OMB, explanations when the agency decides not to use available and 
applicable voluntary consensus standards.
    This proposed rulemaking involves technical standards. The NPRM 
proposes to use SAE standards in the specifications for the 
instrumentation of the SID-IIsFRG, which accords with the NTTAA. This 
proposal would adopt most of the specifications of the SID-IIs which 
was developed by the private sector, except for the FRG modifications. 
As explained in this preamble, the agency has tentatively determined 
that the FRG modifications are needed to assure the durability of the 
test dummy in crash tests.

Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

    Section 202 of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA), 
Public Law 104-4, Federal law requires agencies to prepare a written 
assessment of the costs, benefits, and other effects of proposed or 
final rules that include a Federal mandate likely to result in the 
expenditure by State, local, or tribal governments, in the aggregate, 
or by the private sector, of more than $100 million annually (adjusted 
for inflation with base year of 1995). Before promulgating a NHTSA rule 
for which a written statement is needed, section 205 of the UMRA 
generally requires the agency to identify and consider a

[[Page 70957]]

reasonable number of regulatory alternatives and adopt the least 
costly, most cost-effective, or least burdensome alternative that 
achieves the objectives of the rule.
    This proposed rule would not impose any unfunded mandates under the 
UMRA. This proposed rule would not meet the definition of a Federal 
mandate because it would not impose requirements on anyone. It would 
amend 49 CFR Part 572 by adding design and performance specifications 
for a side impact dummy that the agency may use in the Federal motor 
vehicle safety standards. If this proposed rule becomes final, it would 
affect only those businesses that choose to manufacture or test with 
the dummy. It would not result in costs of $100 million or more to 
either State, local, or tribal governments, in the aggregate, or to the 
private sector.

Plain Language

    Executive Order 12866 requires each agency to write all rules in 
plain language. Application of the principles of plain language 
includes consideration of the following questions:

--Has the agency organized the material to suit the public's needs?
--Are the requirements in the rule clearly stated?
--Does the rule contain technical language or jargon that is not clear?
--Would a different format (grouping and order of sections, use of 
headings, paragraphing) make the rule easier to understand?
--Would more (but shorter) sections be better?
--Could the agency improve clarity by adding tables, lists, or 
diagrams?
--What else could the agency do to make this rulemaking easier to 
understand?
    If you have any responses to these questions, please include them 
in your comments on this NPRM.

Regulation Identifier Number

    The Department of Transportation assigns a regulation identifier 
number (RIN) to each regulatory action listed in the Unified Agenda of 
Federal Regulations. The Regulatory Information Service Center 
publishes the Unified Agenda in April and October of each year. You may 
use the RIN contained in the heading at the beginning of this document 
to find this action in the Unified Agenda.

Public Participation

How Do I Prepare and Submit Comments?

    Your comments must be written and in English. To ensure that your 
comments are correctly filed in the Docket, please include the docket 
number of this document in your comments.
    Your comments must not be more than 15 pages long. (49 CFR 553.21). 
NHTSA established this limit to encourage you to write your primary 
comments in a concise fashion. However, you may attach necessary 
additional documents to your comments. There is no limit on the length 
of the attachments.
    Please submit two copies of your comments, including the 
attachments, to Docket Management at the address given above under 
ADDRESSES.
    You may also submit your comments to the docket electronically by 
logging onto the Dockets Management System Web site at http://dms.dot.gov. Click on ``Help & Information'' or ``Help/Info'' to obtain 
instructions for filing the document electronically.

How Can I Be Sure That My Comments Were Received?

    If you wish Docket Management to notify you upon its receipt of 
your comments, enclose a self-addressed, stamped postcard in the 
envelope containing your comments. Upon receiving your comments, Docket 
Management will return the postcard by mail.

How Do I Submit Confidential Business Information?

    If you wish to submit any information under a claim of 
confidentiality, you should submit three copies of your complete 
submission, including the information you claim to be confidential 
business information, to the Chief Counsel, NHTSA, at the address given 
above under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT. In addition, you should 
submit two copies, from which you have deleted the claimed confidential 
business information, to Docket Management at the address given above 
under ADDRESSES. When you send a comment containing information claimed 
to be confidential business information, you should include a cover 
letter setting forth the information specified in our confidential 
business information regulation. (49 CFR Part 512.)

Will the Agency Consider Late Comments?

    NHTSA will consider all comments that Docket Management receives 
before the close of business on the comment closing date indicated 
above under DATES. To the extent possible, the agency will also 
consider comments that Docket Management receives after that date. If 
Docket Management receives a comment too late for the agency to 
consider it in developing a final rule (assuming that one is issued), 
the agency will consider that comment as an informal suggestion for 
future rulemaking action.

How Can I Read the Comments Submitted by Other People?

    You may read the comments received by Docket Management at the 
address given above under ADDRESSES. The hours of the Docket are 
indicated above in the same location.
    You may also see the comments on the Internet. To read the comments 
on the Internet, take the following steps:
    1. Go to the Docket Management System (DMS) Web page of the 
Department of Transportation (http://dms.dot.gov/).
    2. On that page, click on ``search.''
    3. On the next page (http://dms.dot.gov/search/), type in the four-
digit docket number shown at the beginning of this document. Example: 
If the docket number were ``NHTSA-1998-1234,'' you would type ``1234.'' 
After typing the docket number, click on ``search.''
    4. On the next page, which contains docket summary information for 
the docket you selected, click on the desired comments. You may 
download the comments. Although the comments are imaged documents, 
instead of word processing documents, the ``pdf'' versions of the 
documents are word searchable.
    Please note that even after the comment closing date, NHTSA will 
continue to file relevant information in the Docket as it becomes 
available. Further, some people may submit late comments. Accordingly, 
the agency recommends that you periodically check the Docket for new 
material.
    Anyone is able to search the electronic form of all comments 
received into any of our dockets by the name of the individual 
submitting the comment (or signing the comment, if submitted on behalf 
of an association, business, labor union, etc.). You may review DOT's 
complete Privacy Act Statement in the Federal Register published on 
April 11, 2000 (Volume 65, Number 70; Pages 19477-78) or you may visit 
http://dms.dot.gov.

List of Subjects in 49 CFR Part 572

    Motor vehicle safety, Incorporation by reference.

    In consideration of the foregoing, NHTSA is proposing to amend 49 
CFR Part 572 as follows:

[[Page 70958]]

PART 572--ANTHROPOMORPHIC TEST DUMMIES

    1. The authority citation for Part 572 would continue to read as 
follows:

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

    2. 49 CFR part 572 would be amended by adding a new subpart V 
consisting of Sec. Sec.  572.190 through 572.198.
    The added subpart would read as follows:

Subpart V--SID-IIsFRG Side Impact Crash Test Dummy, 5th Percentile 
Adult Female

Sec.
572.190 Incorporated materials.
572.191 General description.
572.192 Head assembly.
572.193 Neck assembly.
572.194 Thorax with arm.
572.195 Thorax without arm.
572.196 Abdomen.
572.197 Pelvis.
572.198 Instrumentation and test conditions.
Appendix--Figures to Subpart V of Part 572

Subpart V--SID-IIsFRG Side Impact Crash Test Dummy, 5th Percentile 
Adult Female


Sec.  572.190  Incorporated materials.

    (a) The following materials are hereby incorporated into this 
subpart by reference:
    (1) A drawings and inspection package entitled ``Drawings and 
Specifications for the SID-IIsFRG Small Female Crash Test Dummy, 
September 2004'', consisting of:
    (i) Drawing No. 180-0000, SID-IIsFRG Dummy Assembly, incorporated 
by reference in Sec.  572.191;
    (ii) Drawing No. 180-1000, Head Assembly, incorporated by reference 
in Sec. Sec.  572.191 and 572.192 as part of a complete dummy assembly;
    (iii) Drawing No. 180-2000, Neck Assembly, incorporated by 
reference in Sec. Sec.  572.191 and 572.193 as part of a complete dummy 
assembly;
    (iv) Drawing No. 180-3000, Upper Torso Assembly, incorporated by 
reference in Sec. Sec.  572.191, 572.194, 572.195 and 572.196 as part 
of a complete dummy assembly;
    (v) Drawing No. 180-4000, Lower Torso Assembly, incorporated by 
reference in Sec. Sec.  572.191 and 572.197 as part of a complete dummy 
assembly;
    (vi) Drawing No. 180-5000-1, Complete Leg Assembly--left, 
incorporated by reference in Sec. Sec.  572.191 and 572.197 as part of 
a complete dummy assembly;
    (vii) Drawing No. 180-5000-2, Complete Leg Assembly--right, 
incorporated by reference in Sec. Sec.  572.191 and 572.197 as part of 
a complete dummy assembly;
    (viii) Drawing No. 180-6000-1, Arm Assembly--left, incorporated by 
reference in Sec. Sec.  572.191 and 572.194 as part of a complete dummy 
assembly;
    (ix) Drawing No. 180-6000-2, Arm Assembly--right, incorporated by 
reference in Sec. Sec.  572.191 and 572.194 as part of a complete dummy 
assembly;
    (x) the ``Parts/Drawing List, Part 572 Subpart V, SID-IIs with 
Floating Rib Guides (SID-IIsFRG),'' September 2004, incorporated by 
reference in Sec.  572.191;
    (2) A procedures manual entitled ``Procedures for Assembly, 
Disassembly and Inspection (PADI) of the SID-IIsFRG Side Impact Crash 
Test Dummy, October 2004,'' incorporated by reference in Sec.  572.191;
    (3) SAE Recommended Practice J211, Rev. Mar 95 ``Instrumentation 
for Impact Tests--Part 1--Electronic Instrumentation'';
    (4) SAE J1733 of 1994-12 ``Sign Convention for Vehicle Crash 
Testing''.
    (b) The Director of the Federal Register approved the materials 
incorporated by reference in accordance with 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR 
part 51. Copies of SAE Recommended Practice J211 and SAE J1733 may be 
inspected at NHTSA's Technical Reference Library, 400 Seventh Street 
SW., Room 5109, Washington, DC. Copies of the drawing and inspection 
package and the PADI may be inspected in the Docket, or at the National 
Archives and Records Administration (NARA). For information on the 
availability of this material at NARA, call 202-741-6030, or go to: 
http://www.archives.gov/federal_register/code_of_federal_regulations/ibr_locations.html.
    (c) The incorporated materials are available as follows:
    (1) The Drawings and Specifications for the SID-IIsFRG Small Female 
Crash Test Dummy, September 2004, referred to in paragraph (a)(1) of 
this section are available in electronic format through the DOT docket 
management system and in paper format from Leet-Melbrook, Division of 
New RT, 18810 Woodfield Road, Gaithersburg, MD 20879, (301) 670-0090.
    (2) The SAE materials referred to in paragraphs (a)(3) and (a)(4) 
of this section are available from the Society of Automotive Engineers, 
Inc., 400 Commonwealth Drive, Warrendale, PA 15096.


Sec.  572.191  General description.

    (a) The SID-IIsFRG Side Impact Crash Test Dummy, small female, is 
defined by drawings and specifications containing the following 
materials:
    (1) Technical drawings and specifications package P/N 180-0000, 
dated September 2004, the titles of which are listed in Table A;

                                 Table A
------------------------------------------------------------------------
            Component assembly                    Drawing  number
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Head Assembly............................  180-1000
Neck Assembly............................  180-2000
Upper Torso Assembly.....................  180-3000
Lower Torso Assembly.....................  180-4000
Leg Assembly--left.......................  180-5000-1
Leg Assembly--right......................  180-5000-2
Arm Assembly--left.......................  180-6000-1
Arm Assembly--right......................  180-6000-2
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    (2) The ``Parts/Drawing List, Part 572 Subpart V, SID-IIs with 
Floating Rib Guides (SID-IIs FRG, Alpha Version),'' dated September 
2004 and containing 8 pages,
    (3) A listing of available transducers-crash test sensors for the 
SID-IIsFRG Side Impact Crash Test Dummy, 5th percentile female, is 
shown in drawing 180-0000 sheet 2 of 6, dated September 2004,
    (4) ``Procedures for Assembly, Disassembly and Inspection (PADI) of 
the SID-IIsFRG Side Impact Crash Test Dummy, September 2004,''
    (5) Sign convention for signal outputs reference document SAE 1733 
Information Report, titled ``Sign Convention for Vehicle Crash 
Testing,'' dated July 15, 1986.
    (b) Exterior dimensions of the SID-IIsFRG Side Impact Crash Test 
Dummy are shown in drawing 180-0000 sheet 3 of 6, dated September 2004.
    (c) Weights and center of gravity locations of body segments are 
shown in drawing 180-0000 sheet 4 of 6, dated September 2004,
    (d) Adjacent segments are joined in a manner such that, except for 
contacts existing under static conditions, there is no additional 
contact between metallic elements of adjacent body segments throughout 
the range of motion.
    (e) The structural properties of the dummy are such that the dummy 
conforms to this Subpart in every respect before use in any test 
similar to those proposed in Standard 214, Side Impact Protection (49 
CFR 571.214).


Sec.  572.192  Head assembly.

    (a) The head assembly consists of the head (drawing 180-1000), and 
a set of three (3) accelerometers in conformance with specifications in 
49 CFR 572.198(c) and mounted as shown in drawing 180-0000 sheet 2 of 
6. When tested to the procedure specified in paragraph (b) of

[[Page 70959]]

this section, the head assembly shall meet performance requirements 
specified in paragraph (c) of this section.
    (b) Test procedure. The head shall be tested according to the 
procedure specified in 49 CFR 572.112(a).
    (c) Performance criteria. (1) When the head assembly is dropped in 
either the right or left lateral incline orientations in accordance 
with procedure in 572.112(a), the measured peak resultant acceleration 
shall be between 125 g's and 145 g's;
    (2) The resultant acceleration-time curve shall be unimodal to the 
extent that oscillations occurring after the main acceleration pulse 
shall not exceed 15% (zero to peak) of the main pulse;
    (3) The longitudinal acceleration vector (X direction) shall not 
exceed 15 g's.


Sec.  572.193  Neck assembly.

    (a) The neck assembly consists of parts shown in drawing 180-2000. 
For purposes of this test, the neck assembly is mounted within the 
headform assembly (180-9000) as shown in Figure V1 of this subpart. 
When subjected to the test procedure specified in paragraph (b) of this 
section, the neck-headform assembly shall meet the performance 
requirements specified in paragraph (c) of this section.
    (b) Test procedure. (1) Soak the assembly in a test environment as 
specified in 49 CFR 572.198(i);
    (2) Attach the neck-headform assembly to the 49 CFR Part 572 
pendulum test fixture in either the left or right lateral orientations 
(Figure 22) as shown in Figure V2 of this subpart, so that the 
midsagittal plane of the neck-headform assembly is vertical and 
perpendicular to the plane of motion of the pendulum longitudinal 
centerline;
    (3) Release the pendulum from a height sufficient to achieve a 
velocity of 5.57  0.06 m/s measured at the center of the 
pendulum accelerometer, as shown in 49 CFR Part 572 Figure 15, at the 
instant the pendulum makes contact with the decelerating mechanism;
    (4) The neck flexes without the neck-headform assembly making 
contact with any object;
    (5) Time zero is defined as the time of initial contact between the 
pendulum mounted striker plate and the pendulum deceleration mechanism;
    (6) Allow a period of at least thirty (30) minutes between 
successive tests on the same neck assembly.
    (c) Performance Criteria. (1) The pendulum deceleration pulse is 
characterized in terms of decrease in velocity as obtained by 
integrating the pendulum acceleration output from time zero:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
               Time (ms)                     Pendulum Delta-V (m/s)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
10.0..................................  -2.20 to -2.80
15.0..................................  -3.40 to -4.10
20.0..................................  -4.50 to -5.40
25.0..................................  -5.50 to -6.10
25.0 to 100...........................  -5.20 to -6.20
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    (2) The maximum translation-rotation of the midsagittal plane of 
the headform disk (180-9061 or 9062) in the lateral direction measured, 
with the rotation transducer specified in 49 CFR 572.198(d) shall be 74 
to 79 degrees with respect to the longitudinal axis of the pendulum 
occurring between 50 and 70 ms from time zero;
    (3) Peak occipital condyle moment shall not be higher than -40 Nm 
and not lower than -45 Nm. The moment measured by the neck upper load 
cell (Mx) shall be adjusted by the following formula: Mx(oc) \1\= Mx + 
0.01778Fy,
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Mx(oc) is the moment at occipital condyle and Fy is the 
lateral shear force measured by the load cell.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    (4) The decaying moment shall cross the 0 Nm line after peak moment 
113ms-123 ms after time zero.


Sec.  572.194  Thorax with arm.

    (a) The thorax is part of the upper torso assembly shown in drawing 
180-3000. For the ``thorax with arm'' impact test, the dummy is tested 
as a complete assembly (drawing 180-0000). The dummy's thorax is 
equipped with T1 and T12 laterally oriented accelerometers as specified 
in 49 CFR 572.198(c), and with deflection potentiometers for the thorax 
and shoulder as specified in 180-3861 and 180-3860, respectively, 
installed as shown in drawing180-0000 sheet 2 of 6. When subjected to 
the test procedure as specified in paragraph (b) of this section, the 
thorax shall meet performance requirements of paragraph (c) of this 
section.
    (b) Test procedure. (1) Soak the dummy assembly (180-0000) in a 
test environment as specified in 49 CFR 572.198(i);
    (2) Seat the dummy, outfitted with the torso jacket (180-3450) and 
cotton underwear pants, as shown in Figure V3 of this subpart, on a 
certification bench, specified in Figure V4 of this subpart, with the 
seat pan and the seatback surfaces covered with a 2 mm thick PTFE 
(Teflon) sheet;
    (3) Align the impact side of the seated dummy tangent to a vertical 
plane located within 25 mm of the side edge of the bench and set the 
midsagittal plane of the dummy to a vertical orientation.
    (4) Push the dummy at the knees and at the upper torso with just 
sufficient horizontally oriented force towards the seat back until its 
buttocks and the back of the upper torso are in contact with the seat 
back. The top of the shoulder rib mount (drawing 180-3352) orientation 
in the fore-and-aft direction is 24.6  1.0 degrees relative 
to horizontal.
    (5) Lower the legs such that the thighs touch the seat pan, the 
inner part of the right and left legs at the knees are in contact with 
each other, the heels touch the designated support surface and the feet 
are vertical and as close together as possible;
    (6) The dummy's thoracic lateral reference surface is 0  1 degree relative to horizontal as shown in Figure V3 of this 
subpart;
    (7) Orient the arm downward to the lowest detent;
    (8) The impactor is specified in 49 CFR 572.198(a);
    (9) The impactor is guided, if needed, so that at contact with the 
dummy's arm, its longitudinal axis is within  1 degree of a 
horizontal plane and perpendicular to the midsagittal plane of the 
dummy. The centerpoint of the impactor face is within 2 mm of the 
vertical midpoint of the second thoracic rib and coincident with a line 
parallel to the seat back incline passing through the center of the 
shoulder yoke assembly arm pivot (drawing 180-3327), as shown in Figure 
V3 of this subpart;
    (10) The dummy's arm is impacted at 6.7  0.1 m/s.
    (c) Performance criteria. (1) While the impactor is in contact with 
the dummy's arm, the thoracic ribs and the shoulder shall conform to 
the following range of deflections:
    (i) Shoulder not less than 28 mm and not more than 34 mm;
    (ii) Upper thorax rib not less than 23 mm and not more than 28 mm;
    (iii) Middle thorax rib not less 28 mm and not more than 33 mm;
    (iv) Lower thorax rib not less than 31 mm and not more than 36 mm;
    (2) Peak acceleration of the upper spine (T1) shall not be less 
than 40 g's and not more than 46 g's and of the lower spine (T12) not 
less than 37 g's and not more than 41 g's;
    (3) Peak impactor acceleration shall be not less than 30 g's and 
not more than 36 g's.


Sec.  572.195  Thorax without arm.

    (a) The thorax is part of the upper torso assembly shown in drawing 
180-3000. For this thorax test, the dummy is tested as a complete 
assembly (drawing

[[Page 70960]]

180-0000) with the arm (180-6000) removed. The dummy's thorax is 
equipped with T1 and T12 laterally oriented accelerometers as specified 
in 49 CFR 572.198(c) and with deflection potentiometers for the thorax 
as specified in drawing 180-3861, installed as shown in drawing 180-
0000 sheet 2 of 6. When subjected to the test procedure specified in 
paragraph (b) of this section, the thorax shall meet the performance 
requirements set forth in paragraph (c) of this section.
    (b) Test procedure. (1) Soak the dummy assembly (180-0000) in a 
test environment as specified in 49 CFR 572.198(i);
    (2) Seat the dummy, outfitted with the torso jacket (180-3450) and 
cotton underwear pants, as shown in Figure V5 of this subpart, on a 
certification bench, specified in Figure V4 of this subpart, with the 
seat pan and the seatback surfaces covered with a 2 mm thick PTFE 
(Teflon) sheet;
    (3) Align the impact side of the seated dummy tangent to a vertical 
plane located within 25 mm of the side edge of the bench and set the 
midsagittal plane of the dummy to a vertical orientation.
    (4) Push the dummy at the knees and at the upper torso with just 
sufficient horizontally oriented force towards the seat back until its 
buttocks and the back of the upper torso are in contact with the seat 
back. The top of the shoulder rib mount (drawing 180-3352) orientation 
in the fore-and-aft direction is 24.6  1.0 degrees relative 
to the horizontal.
    (5) Lower the legs such that the thighs touch the seat pan, the 
inner part of the right and left legs at the knees are in contact with 
each other, the heels touch the designated support surface and the feet 
are vertical and as close together as possible;
    (6) The dummy's thoracic lateral reference surface is 0  1 degree relative to the horizontal as shown in Figure V5 of 
this subpart;
    (7) The impactor is specified in 49 CFR 572.198(a);
    (8) The impactor is guided, if needed, so that at contact with the 
thorax, its longitudinal axis is within 1 degree of a horizontal plane 
and perpendicular to the midsagittal plane of the dummy. The 
centerpoint of the impactor face is within 2 mm of the vertical 
midpoint of the second thorax rib and coincident with a line parallel 
to the seat back incline passing through the center of the shoulder 
yoke assembly arm pivot (drawing 180-3327), as shown in Figure V5 of 
this subpart;
    (9) The dummy's thorax is impacted at 4.3  0.1 m/s;
    (c) Performance criteria. (1) While the impactor is in contact with 
the dummy's thorax, the ribs shall conform to the following range of 
deflections:
    (i) Upper and lower thorax ribs not less than 33 mm and not more 
than 39 mm;
    (ii) Middle thorax rib not less than 38 mm and not more than 43 mm;
    (iii) Peak acceleration of the upper spine (T1) shall not be less 
than 14 g's and not more than 18 g's and of the lower spine (T12) not 
less than 8 g's and not more than 12 g's.
    (iv) Peak impactor acceleration shall not be less than 16 g's and 
not more than 19 g's.
    (2) [Reserved]


Sec.  572.196  Abdomen.

    (a) The abdomen assembly is part of the upper torso assembly (180-
3000) and is represented by two ribs (180-3368) and the deflection 
sensors (180-3861). The abdomen test is conducted on the assembled 
dummy (180-0000) with the arm (180-6000) on the impacted side removed. 
The dummy is equipped with a lower spine laterally oriented 
accelerometer as specified in 49 CFR 572.198(c) and deflection 
potentiometers specified in drawing 180-3861, installed as shown in 
sheet 2 of drawing 180-0000. When subjected to the test procedure as 
specified in paragraph (b) of this section, the abdomen shall meet 
performance requirements of paragraph (c) of this section.
    (b) Test procedure. (1) Soak the dummy assembly (180-0000) in a 
test environment as specified in 49 CFR 572.198(i);
    (2) Seat the dummy, outfitted with the torso jacket (180-3450) and 
cotton underwear pants, as shown in Figure V6 of this subpart, on a 
certification bench, specified in Figure V4 of this subpart, with the 
seat pan and the seatback surfaces covered with a 2 mm thick PTFE 
(Teflon) sheet;
    (3) Align the impacted side of the seated dummy tangent to a 
vertical plane located within 25 mm of the side edge of the bench and 
set the midsagittal plane of the dummy to a vertical orientation;
    (4) Push the dummy at the knees and at the upper torso with just 
sufficient horizontally oriented force towards the seat back until its 
buttocks and the back of the upper torso are in contact with the seat 
back. The top of the shoulder rib mount (drawing 180-3352) orientation 
in the fore-and-aft direction is 24.6  1.0 degrees relative 
to the horizontal;
    (5) Lower the legs such that the thighs touch the seat pan, the 
inner part of the right and left legs at the knees are in contact with 
each other, the heels touch the designated support surface and the feet 
are vertical and as close together as possible;
    (6) The dummy's thoracic lateral reference surface is within 0 
 1 degree relative to the horizontal as shown in Figure V6 
of this subpart;
    (7) The impactor is specified in 49 CFR 572.198(b);
    (8) The impactor is guided, if needed, so that at contact with the 
abdomen, its longitudinal axis is within  1 degree of a 
horizontal plane and perpendicular to the midsagittal plane of the 
dummy and the centerpoint of the impactor's face is within 2 mm of the 
vertical midpoint between the two abdominal ribs and coincident with a 
line parallel to the seat back incline passing through the center of 
the shoulder yoke assembly arm pivot (drawing 180-3327), as shown in 
Figure V6 of this subpart;
    (9) The dummy's abdomen is impacted at 4.3 0.1 m/s.
    (c) Performance criteria. (1) While the impact probe is in contact 
with the dummy's abdomen, the deflection of each abdominal rib shall be 
not less than 36 mm and not more than 42 mm;
    (2) Peak acceleration of the lower spine (T12) laterally oriented 
accelerometer shall be not less than 11 g's and not more than 15 g's;
    (3) Peak impactor acceleration shall be not less than 13 g's and 
not more than 16 g's.


Sec.  572.197  Pelvis.

    (a) The pelvis is part of the lower torso assembly shown in drawing 
180-4000. The pelvis test is conducted on the assembled dummy (drawing 
180-0000), with the torso jacket (180-3450) removed. The dummy is 
equipped with a laterally oriented pelvis accelerometer as specified in 
49 CFR 572.198(c), acetabulum load cell SA572-S68, and iliac wing load 
cell SA572-S66, mounted as shown in sheet 2 of 6 of drawing 180-0000. 
When subjected to the test procedure as specified in paragraph (b) of 
this section, the pelvis shall meet performance requirements of 
paragraph (c) of this section.
    (b) Test procedure. (1) Soak the dummy assembly (180-0000) in a 
test environment as specified in 49 CFR 572.198(i);
    (2) Seat the dummy, without the torso jacket and cotton underwear 
pants, as shown in Figure V7 of this subpart, on a certification bench, 
specified in Figure V4 of this subpart, with the seatpan and the 
seatback surfaces covered with a 2 mm thick PTFE (Teflon) sheet;
    (3) Align the impacted side of the seated dummy tangent to a 
vertical

[[Page 70961]]

plane located within 25 mm of the side edge of the bench and set the 
midsagittal plane of the dummy to a vertical orientation.
    (4) Push the dummy at the knees and at the upper torso with just 
sufficient horizontally oriented force towards the seat back until its 
buttocks and the back of the upper torso are in contact with the seat 
back. The top of the shoulder rib mount (drawing 180-3352) orientation 
in the fore-and-aft direction is 24.6  1.0 degrees relative 
to the horizontal.
    (5) Lower the legs such that the thighs touch the seat pan, the 
inner part of the right and left legs at the knees are in contact with 
each other, the heels touch the designated support surface and the feet 
are vertical and as close together as possible;
    (6) The dummy's thoracic lateral reference surface is within 0 
 1 degree relative to the horizontal as shown in Figure V7 
of this subpart;
    (7) The pelvis impactor is specified in 49 CFR 572.198(a);
    (8) The impactor is guided, if needed, so that at contact with the 
pelvis, its longitudinal axis is within  1 degree of a 
horizontal plane and perpendicular to the midsagittal plane of the 
dummy. The centerpoint of the impactor's face is within 2 mm of the 
centerline of the screw (9001191) through the center of the acetabulum 
load cell, as shown in Figure V7 of this subpart;
    (9) The dummy's pelvis is impacted at 6.7  0.1 m/s.
    (c) Performance criteria. While the impactor is contact with the 
pelvis:
    (1) Peak acceleration of the impactor is not less than 45 g's and 
not more than 49 g's;
    (2) Peak acceleration of the pelvis is not less than 42 g's and not 
more than 46 g's and occurs 5 ms or more after the impactor contacts 
the dummy;
    (3) Peak acetabulum force is not less than 3882 N and not more than 
4270 N;
    (4) Peak iliac wing force is not less than 524 N and not more than 
730 N.


Sec.  572.198  Instrumentation and test conditions.

    (a) The test probe for lateral thorax and pelvis impact tests is 
the same as that specified in 49 CFR 572.137(a) except that its impact 
face diameter is 120.70  0.25 mm and it has a minimum mass 
moment of inertia of 3646 kg-cm 2;
    (b) The test probe for the lateral abdomen impact test is the same 
as that specified in 572.137(a) except that its impact face diameter is 
76.20  0.25 mm and it has a minimum mass moment of inertia 
of 3646 kg-cm 2;
    (c) Accelerometers for the head, the thoracic spine, and the pelvis 
conform to specifications of SA572-S4;
    (d) Rotary potentiometers for the neck-headform assembly conform to 
SA572-S51;
    (e) Instrumentation and sensors conform to the Recommended Practice 
SAE J-211 (March 1995), Instrumentation for Impact Test, unless noted 
otherwise;
    (f) All instrumented response signal measurements shall be treated 
to the following specifications:
    (1) Head acceleration--Digitally filtered CFC 1000;
    (2) Neck-headform assembly translation-rotation--Digitally filtered 
CFC 60;
    (3) Neck pendulum, T1 and T12 thoracic spine and pelvis 
accelerations--Digitally filtered CFC 180;
    (4) Neck forces (for the purpose of occipital condyle calculation) 
and moments--Digitally filtered at CFC 600;
    (5) Pelvis, thorax and abdomen impactor accelerations--Digitally 
filtered CFC 180;
    (6) Acetabulum and iliac wings forces--Digitally filtered at CFC 
600;
    (7) Shoulder, thorax, and abdomen deflection--Digitally filtered 
CFC 600.
    (g) Mountings for the head, thoracic spine and pelvis 
accelerometers shall have no resonant frequency within a range of 3 
times the frequency range of the applicable channel class;
    (h) Leg joints of the test dummy are set at the force between 1 to 
2 g's, which just support the limb's weight when the limbs are extended 
horizontally forward. The force required to move a limb segment does 
not exceed 2 g's throughout the range of the limb motion.
    (i) Performance tests are conducted, unless specified otherwise, at 
any temperature from 20.6 to 22.2 degrees C. (69 to 72 degrees F.) and 
at any relative humidity from 10% to 70% after exposure of the dummy to 
those conditions for a period of 3 hours.

BILLING CODE 4910-59-P

Appendix--Figures to Subpart V of Part 572

[[Page 70962]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP08DE04.036


[[Page 70963]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP08DE04.037


[[Page 70964]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP08DE04.038


[[Page 70965]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP08DE04.039


[[Page 70966]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP08DE04.040


[[Page 70967]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP08DE04.041


[[Page 70968]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP08DE04.042


[[Page 70969]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP08DE04.043


[[Page 70970]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP08DE04.044



[[Page 70971]]


    Issued November 30, 2004.
Stephen R. Kratzke,
Associate Administrator for Rulemaking.
[FR Doc. 04-26753 Filed 12-7-04; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-59-C