- Cockpit of KITDS comprises a compact sized passenger car. • The system accommodates training for both. and manual transmission (MT. 11 1010 15 15 2020 2525 30.
- Hitachi kp-m1ap compact ccd camera. gould 984 programmable controller model 680 gould 11-1010-99 scr servo controller. general electric 180 amp 3 pole contact.
ABB ACS500 ABB Unbadged Model ACS500. Allen Bradley 1769-PA4 Allen Bradley Compact I/O. Automated Compressor Management System 4 Plus System 4.
. R. B., and Purves. D. 1999. The effects of color on brightness. Nature Neurosci. 2, 11, 1010. We propose a volumetric drawing system that. manual 3D editing. I HAVE A COMPACT STEREO SOUND SYSTEM GE MOD 11-1010. I HAVE ONE GE MOD 11-1010 COMPACT STEREO SOUND SYSTEM. the user manual for GE Spacemaker cd radio model.
I HAVE A COMPACT STEREO SOUND SYSTEM GE MOD 1. SOMEHelp this question get an answer. Is this question mis- categorized or about a different product? Help this question get an answer by entering the correct category or product below.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: I. Introduction. II. Executive Summary. III. Safety Problem. IV. Regulatory, Research and Technological Developments—1. Presenta. 1. 99. 0 Simulated Vehicle- to- Vehicle Test—Chest and Pelvic Injury Criteriab. Establishment of Upper Interior Impact Protection Requirementsc.
First Inflatable Side Impact Protection Systemsd. Report to Congress re Possibility of Harmonizing U. S. and European Vehicle- to- Vehicle Testse. Head Injury Protection Criteria and First Generation Side Impact Test Dummy Capable of Measuring Head Impact Forcesf.
Pole Test To Evaluate Inflatable Side Impact Head Protection Systemsg. Grant of 1. 99. 8 Petition To Upgrade Side Impact Protection Standardh. NHTSA Research re Vehicle- to- Vehicle Test Harmonizationi. Report to Congress and Response to Petition re Vehicle- to- Vehicle Test Harmonizationj. NHTSA Research re Side Impact Dummies, Injury Criteria, and Crash Testsk.
Current Status of Second and Next Generation Side Impact Dummiesl. Industry Efforts To Improve Compatibility in Vehicle- to- Vehicle Crashes. V. Existing Standard. VI. Proposed Vehicle- to- Pole Test Procedures, Dummies and Injury Criteriaa. Test Procedure. 1.
Speed. 2. Angle of Impact. Positioning the Seat and Impact Reference Lineb. Dummies and Injury Criteria.
Percentile Male Dummy (ES- 2re)A. Background. B. Injury Criteria. C. Oblique Pole Tests With ES- 2 and ES- 2re. D. Comparing the ES- 2re to the SID- H3. Percentile Female Dummy (SID- IIs. FRG)A. Background. B. Injury Criteria.
C. Oblique Pole Tests With 5th Percentile Female Dummyc. FMVSS No. 2. 01 Pole Test Conditions. VII. Proposed Improvements of Moving Deformable Barrier Testa. Replacement of Existing 5.
Percentile Male Dummy With ES- 2re and Addition of Injury Criteriab. Addition of 5th Percentile Female Dummy (SID- IIs. FRG) and Injury Criteria. VIII. Other Issuesa. Struck Door Must Not Separate From Vehicleb. Rear Seatc. Interaction With Other Side Impact Programs.
Out- of- Position Criteria. FMVSS No. 2. 01 Pole Testd. Harmonization. IX. Estimated Benefits and Costs of Proposed Pole Test. X. Proposed Leadtime and Phase- In. XI. Rulemaking Analyses and Notices. XII. Public Participation.
I. Introduction. This rulemaking is a first step toward achieving two goals: improving side impact protection and reducing the risk of ejection. Both goals have been highlighted in recent agency planning documents.
On July 2. 5, 2. 00. FR 4. 85. 99; Docket No.
NHTSA- 2. 00. 2- 2. Two months later, NHTSA Administrator Jeffrey W. Runge, M. D., formed Integrated Project Teams (IPTs) to conduct an in- depth review of four top priority safety areas. Among them are vehicle compatibility and rollover. Those two areas were selected because they represent the key safety issues presented by the changing composition of the passenger vehicle fleet. The sales and registrations of light trucks, buses and multipurpose passenger vehicles (LTVs) as a percentage of the light vehicle fleet have steadily increased since 1. In fact, sales of LTVs reached 5.
The IPTs were chartered to develop comprehensive, science and evidence- based analyses to identify innovative solutions and recommend effective strategies. Significant progress has been made in addressing these priorities. On June 1. 8, 2. 00. NHTSA announced the availability of two reports, “Initiatives to Address Vehicle Compatibility,”1and “Initiatives to Address the Mitigation of Rollovers,”2based on the work of the vehicle compatibility and rollover IPTs (6. FR 3. 65. 34). Initiatives to upgrade side impact protection and reduce ejection figure prominently in both reports.
One month later, the agency announced the availability of its final priority plan, “NHTSA Vehicle Safety Rulemaking and Supporting Research: 2. FR 4. 39. 72; July 1. The plan, which reflects the results of a comprehensive examination of areas of possible improvements, “outlines the agency's vehicle safety rulemaking actions for the period 2. Upgrading side impact protection is one of the most promising of those actions.
IPTVehicle. Compatibility. Report/. 2http: //www- nrd. IPTRollover. Mitigation. Report/. 3http: //www. Priority. Plan/Final. Veh/Index. html. Today's proposal to upgrade the agency's side impact protection standard begins the implementation of the initiatives in the agency's report on improving crash compatibility between passenger cars and LTVs (“Initiatives to Address Vehicle Compatibility,” supra.) This proposal would require vehicle manufacturers to assure side impact protection for a wider range of occupant sizes and over a broader range of seating positions. It would likely lead to the installation of new technologies, such as side curtain air bags and torso side air bags capable of improving head and thorax protection to occupants of vehicles that are laterally struck by a higher- riding LTV.
These different side air bag systems are described in a glossary set forth in Appendix A to this preamble.)II. Executive Summary. In 1. 99. 0, the agency amended its side impact protection standard, Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) No.
Side Impact Protection,” to include a dynamic test, the first anywhere in the world, that assesses occupant protection when a vehicle is struck in the side by another vehicle. A moving deformable barrier is crashed into the side of a vehicle in a manner that simulates a 9. The standard addresses thoracic and pelvic injuries to struck- side occupants in those vehicle- to- vehicle crashes. However, the standard does not address side crashes into fixed narrow objects, which account for approximately 2. It also does not address head injuries, which account for 4. NPRM. For smaller- statured occupants, head injury represents a higher proportion of the serious injuries than it does for larger occupants as a result of relatively more head contacts with the striking vehicle.
Samaha R. S., Elliott D. S., “NHTSA Side Impact Research: Motivation for Upgraded Test Procedures,” 1.
International Technical Conference on the Enhanced Safety Of Vehicles Conference (ESV), Paper No. The current state of knowledge and practicability of measures that could be taken to improve side impact protection are considerably greater than they were just a decade ago.
Extensive work by NHTSA, the industry, and others in the safety community have led to substantial progress in dummies, injury criteria and countermeasures. Inflatable side protection systems have become common in current production vehicles. They vary widely in designs, sizes, mounting locations and methods of inflation, and areas of coverage. For example, variations of side impact protection systems include door- mounted thorax bags, seat- mounted thorax bags, seat- mounted head/thorax bags, and head protection systems that deploy from the roof rails (e. Based on this progress and the growing significance of vehicle compatibility issues, NHTSA is proposing to upgrade FMVSS No.
GVWR) of 4,5. 36 kilograms (kg) or less (1. This would be the first time that head injury criteria would need to be met under the standard. The vehicle- to- pole test is similar to the one currently used optionally in FMVSS No. NHTSA proposes to change the angle of impact from 9. The pole test would apply to the driver and front outboard passenger seats, and not to the rear seats.
In contrast, the moving deformable barrier test applies to both the front and rear outboard seating positions on the side of the vehicle struck by the barrier. In the pole and MDB tests, both sides of the vehicle are subject to testing by NHTSA. Manufacturers must certify that the vehicle complies with the standard when either side of the vehicle is tested by NHTSA. The standard does not require NHTSA to test both sides of the vehicle. While 2. 0 mph converts to 3. Vehicles would need to meet the injury criteria using new dummies representing mid- size males and small females. Crash data indicate that 3.
Thus, the agency believes that use of both dummies, instead of just themid- size male dummy, will better represent the at- risk population. You may inspect the dummies by contacting our Vehicle Research and Test Center in East Liberty, OH. For the mid- size or 5. NHTSA proposes to adopt a modified version of the European side impact dummy, the ES- 2 dummy, for use in the test, since the overall dummy is technically superior to the SID- H3 5.
FMVSS No. 2. 01 and to the SID 5. FMVSS No. 2. 14. The modified ES- 2 dummy (known as the ES- 2re) is superior in that it has improved biofidelity and enhanced injury assessment capability compared to the other dummies. A predecessor dummy, known as Euro. SID- 1, is currently specified by European governments for use in perpendicular side impact testing and work has been undertaken to replace that dummy with the ES- 2re. The non- governmental European New Car Assessment Program (Euro. NCAP) on side impact has used the ES- 2 dummy since February 2.
MDB side impact tests. The small or 5th percentile female dummy has been used by Transport Canada in crash tests in the late 1. Insurance Institute for Highway Safety (IIHS), a nonprofit group funded by insurers, in IIHS's side impact consumer information program which ranks vehicles based on performance when impacted perpendicularly by a moving barrier at about 3. The countermeasures that are installed to meet the proposed pole test would need to enable the vehicle to meet the requirements when tested with both dummies, which would ensure protection for shorter drivers who sit closer to the steering wheel than the mid- size occupant. We anticipate that vehicle manufacturers will install dynamically deploying side air bags to meet the proposed vehicle- to- pole test.
The agency estimates that the proposals in this NPRM would prevent 6. MAIS 3 to 5 injuries a year when fully implemented throughout the light vehicle fleet. Those benefits are based on an assumption that manufacturers would use a 2- sensor (per vehicle) combination air bag system.