Research News Vol. 5 Issue 7

SPECIAL EDITION 10/NO.7

‘Safer cars for pedestrians, but more coStly to repair?’

iNSiDe: real WorlD peDeStriaN colliSioNS p2actiVe boNNet DeploymeNtS p12 repair iSSueS oF actiVe boNNetS p14co2 - tHe VeHicle maNuFacturer liability eXplaiNeD p16 Security upDate p26

researchn e w s

Although vehicles are becoming safer

and road deaths continue to decline,

vulnerable road users account for

a high proportion of those who

are killed and seriously injured

every year. Pedestrians now

account for 22% of reported deaths

and serious injuries on UK roads.

In 2009, the number of children aged

under 15 killed or seriously injured (KSI)

was 2,671; and the majority of child KSI

casualties are pedestrians, accounting

for 62% of the total in 2009. Vehicles

colliding with pedestrians account for

a large proportion of the real world

crashes in the UK, with children and

teenagers accounting for over one

third of these casualties.

REALWORLD

PEDESTRIAN COLLISIONS

“over one in five serious

casualties and deaths on

uK roads are pedestrians.”

“the majority of child and elderly fatalities were pedestrians.”2 3

fIRST STAgE The car bumper contacts the pedestrian’s leg – the bumper strike. The bumper strike can result in lower leg injuries, and knee injuries that are particularly debilitating and costly.

SECOND STAgE The bonnet leading edge strike, where the pedestrian’s upper leg is struck by the top of the bumper and the front edge of the bonnet causing severe pelvic injuries.

ThIRD STAgE The pedestrian rolls over the front of the car and onto the bonnet – the bonnet strike. The pedestrian’s upper body and head will strike onto the bonnet, which is usually made from sheet metal and can provide some energy absorption. The bonnet is crushed downward by the pedestrian until it contacts with the engine and stiff parts underneath.

The engine, suspension turrets, and windscreen wiper spindles are the parts that most often cause injury to pedestrians. Depending upon the speed of the impact, pedestrians can often hit the windscreen which is relatively soft, or they will hit the windscreen surround, often very stiff and unforgiving.

fOuRTh STAgE The road strike, which happens as the pedestrian falls to the ground. The pedestrian may fall in many directions, including being pushed forward to land in front of the car, or being thrown up in the air over the top of the car to land behind it. Up to 45% of all pedestrian casualties are reported to be due to the injuries resulting from the road strike following the impact with the car.

BumPER STRIkE BONNET LEADINg EDgE STRIkE

BONNET STRIkE ROAD STRIkE

many manufacturers have introduced pedestrian friendly solutions that can protect these vulnerable road users from hitting stiff parts of the vehicle by softening the front end of vehicles.

“Although there has been progress in vehicle occupant protection, pedestrian casualties still represent a large number of fatalities on uk roads” Andrew miller, Director of Research, Thatcham

A CAR-TO-PEDESTRIAN COLLISION INvOLvES COmPLEx DyNAmICS AS ThE CAR STRIkES ThE PEDESTRIAN, and this can be separated into several stages.

Approximate Times

Bumper: 41ms Leading edge: 102ms head strike: 183ms ground: 1,138ms

Casualties:Pedestrians15,311Pedal cyclists13,811Motorcycle18,489Cars72,165Bus or coach2,239Other5,642

cars: 65%

vulnerable road users:

20%

others: 15%

All Road Casualties(Fatal, serious and slight injuries)

Pedestrian collisions are very complex and dependupon many factors including the speed and trajectory of the pedestrian in relationship to the car, as well as the size, weight and age of the pedestrian. The design of the vehicle that hits a pedestrian also plays a significant part in determining injury risk. For example, a low speed impact might only include bumper contact, whereas a higher speed impact might involve interaction with the bumper, bonnet leading edge, and the bonnet, before throwing pedestrians violently over the top of the car, so they land on the unforgiving road surface.

Research has suggested that car fronts could be more pedestrian friendly, following the pioneering work of Euro NCAP in encouraging best practice pedestrian friendly front ends.

Many manufacturers have introduced pedestrian friendly solutions that can protect the pedestrian from hitting stiff parts of the vehicle by softening the front end of vehicles. Vehicle design can and does play an increasing role in reducing the risk of pedestrian casualties by the careful design of components that avoid sharp edges and incorporating energy absorbing features into the front end design.

4 5

Pedestrian protection has also received additional weight within the recently revised Euro NCAP rating scheme. The new overall rating, which includes pedestrian protection, encourages car makers to improve pedestrian protection, in order to receive 4 or 5 star ratings in the future. In addition, Euro NCAP has recently changed its pedestrian test protocol in order to improve harmonisation with the European regulations, although the speeds and injury criteria are more stringent than the regulation requirements.

Euro NCAP’s tests involve leg form, upper leg form and child/adult head form testing. A series of tests are carried out to replicate accidents involving child and adult pedestrians where impacts occur at 40km/h (25mph). Impact sites over the front of the car are then assessed and rated as good, adequate, and marginal.

Leg protection can be improved with bumpers which are designed to deform when they hit a pedestrian’s leg. If the leg is impacted low down, away from the knee, and if the forces are spread over a longer length of leg to increase the area for absorbing energy, then protection is improved.

For the leading edge of the bonnet, improvements can result from the removal of unnecessarily stiff and sharp structures.

The bonnet top area needs to be able to deform and absorb energy in a controlled manner in order to protect the head. However, it is important that sufficient clearance is provided above the stiff engine and suspension structures, which can be contacted by the pedestrian head as the bonnet deforms.

Regulatory and consumer organisations carry out tests to assess the level of protection provided by cars in pedestrian collisions. The aim is to save the lives of pedestrians of all shape and sizes by encouraging vehicle manufacturers to introduce features that can protect vulnerable road users. This also has the positive side effect of negating the emotional trauma suffered by many drivers as they live with the psychological consequences of fatally wounding or injuring a pedestrian.

Although crash tests traditionally use whole dummies to replicate human behaviour, the use of a complete pedestrian surrogate is very difficult due to the complex dynamics of a walking pedestrian and a moving car.

Although it is possible to control the point of impact of the bumper against the pedestrian’s leg, it is difficult to control the precise trajectory of the dummy’s head leading to unrepeatable tests. To overcome this problem, individual component tests are used. A leg form test assesses the protection afforded to the lower leg by the bumper (bumper strike),

an upper leg form assesses the leading edge of the bonnet (bonnet leading edge strike), and child and adult head forms are used to assess the bonnet top area (bonnet strike).

The regulations came into effect in two phases, with the second phase only recently implemented at the end of 2009. The so-called phase 2 includes modified test parameters and a new time schedule. A new Global Technical Regulation (GTR) on pedestrian protection was also agreed in 2009, which will encourage manufacturers from around the world to also consider pedestrian protection.

INTERNATIONALREguLATION & CONSumER TESTINg

GOOD ADEQUATE MARGINAL

Leg

Upper Leg

Child HeadAdult Head

Euro NCAP pedestrian test procedures.

“A series of tests are carried out to replicate accidents involving child and adult pedestrians where impacts occur at 40km/h (25mph)”

6 7

One of Thatcham’s core activities is encouraging better damageability performance in low speed crashes. In view of this, Thatcham and other RCAR (Research Council for Automobile Repairs) partners have been testing low speed damageability characteristics for many years. Due to issues of bumper height mismatch, underride and sub-optimisation, a new test was developed that concentrates on bumper performance alone. This test, run at 10km/h uses a standardised bumper beam that replicates a real car bumper system.

Thatcham has been publishing bumper test ratings since 2007. The ratings are generated based on the repair costs and the engagement characteristics of the impact. Ratings are published for impacts on both the front and rear of the car, and are Good, Acceptable, Marginal or Poor.

For more information on bumper testing see www.thatcham.org/bumpers

However, some vehicle manufacturers have claimed that good bumper performance to protect the car from damage and control repair costs leads to the design of bumper structures that are incompatible with pedestrian protection. In the Euro NCAP pedestrian tests, the maximum score for the lower leg impact is 6 points. In a collision, the pedestrian’s lower leg typically impacts the bumper region of the vehicle, so it is useful to make a comparison of the bumper ratings against the pedestrian lower leg scores. There is little pattern revealed in this sample of cars; some vehicles with a high lower leg score have a very expensive repair cost. However, several mainstream manufacturers have scored very highly in the pedestrian lower leg test, but have also managed to control repair costs; reinforcing the view that good bumper performance and high levels of pedestrian protection are not mutually exclusive.

For example, the Toyota Auris has a high lower leg score and is the vehicle with the lowest repair costs, which suggests that pedestrian protection and damageability are not mutually exclusive.

Vehicle ThATchAm bumper TesTFront bumper engagementrepair cost (£ incl. VAT)

euro NcAplower leg score(max = 6 points)

Subaru Impreza 2008 On 5,638 Underride 6

Alfa Romeo MiTo 2009 On 4,962 Underride 6

Mazda 6 2008 On 4,349 Engaged 6

Honda Jazz 2009 On 3,924 Underride 6

Volkswagen Golf Mk6 2009 On 3,541 Underride 6

Vauxhall Insignia 2009 On 3,522 Engaged 6

Toyota iQ 2009 On 2,757 Underride 6

Hyundai i10 2008 On 2,741 Underride 6

Ford Fiesta 2009 On 2,559 Engaged 6

Honda CRV 2007 To 2009 2,274 Underride 6

Citroën C4 Picasso 2007 On 2,084 Engaged 6

Ford Mondeo 2007 On 1,944 Engaged 6

Peugeot 308 2008 On 1,862 Engaged 6

Nissan Qashqai 2007 To 2010 1,362 Override 6

Citroen C3 Picasso 2009 On 1,358 Engaged 6

Kia Soul 2009 On 3,253 Underride 5.89

Toyota Urban Cruiser 2009 On 1,249 Engaged 5.87

Toyota Auris 2007 To 2009 966 Engaged 5.8

Renault Laguna III 2008 On 2,344 Engaged 5.72

Fiat 500 2008 On 2,865 Underride 5.57

Mercedes-Benz C Class 2007 On 4,182 Underride 5.57

Vauxhall Corsa 2007 On 1,703 Engaged 4.98

Mazda 2 2008 On 2,955 Engaged 4.45

Ford S-Max 2006 To 2010 1,959 Engaged 4.21

Land Rover Freelander 2007 On 1,612 Override 0

MINI Mini 2007 On 2,019 Engaged 0

Front bumper test ratings compared to Euro NCAP pedestrian lower leg scores.

LEGPROTECTION

bumper StriKe

Subaru impreza – euro Ncap loWer leg maXimum 6 poiNtS – repair coSt £5,638

toyota auriS – euro Ncap loWer leg 5.8 poiNtS - repair coSt £966

“pedestrian protection and vehicle repairability are not mutually exclusive” matthew avery, research manager - crash & Safety, thatcham

8 9

There are several types of active bonnet system on the market in the UK, including systems fitted on the BMW 5-Series, Citroën C6, Honda Legend, Jaguar XF, Mercedes E-Class, and Peugeot RCZ.

Thatcham has assessed three systems, and each one has different features of deployment mechanisms and repair methods.

The Jaguar XF system uses an airbag that is pyrotechnically deployed, which lifts the bonnet upward.

The system on the Mercedes E-Class uses the mechanical deployment of a spring to push the bonnet upward.

The latest BMW 5-Series is similar, since a spring is used to push the bonnet upward, although this is triggered pyrotechnically. Furthermore, the front of the 5-Series bonnet is also pyrotechnically fired upward on springs in the catch.

One feature of bonnet design that can help to protect pedestrians from severe head injury is to promote the absorption of energy as the head hits the bonnet. Research has shown that bonnets that allow deformation by the head reduce the risk of head injury by up to 30%. However, head injuries do not typically occur by the head interacting with the bonnet, but with the head riding through the bonnet and hitting the very stiff structure of the engine and suspension towers below.

The position of the bonnet in relation to the engine is largely a matter of styling. Some designs, such as people carriers and small family hatchbacks tend to have plenty of space beneath the bonnet. However, some large sports saloons such as BMW, Jaguar and Mercedes tend to favour low bonnetsand larger engines, possibly at odds with pedestrian safety. Increasing space between the bonnet and engine during the crash can be a solution and this is where we see the introduction of pedestrian active bonnets.

HEADPROTECTION

BONNET STRIkE

howeVer, The use oF AcTiVe boNNeTs rAises some quesTioNs:

Do tHe boNNetS actually Deploy WHeN tHe car HitS a peDeStriaN?

Do tHeSe actiVe boNNetS Deploy iN a typical loW SpeeD impact uNNeceSSarily WHeN tHere iS No peDeStriaN to protect?

Will actiVe boNNetS aDVerSely aFFect repair coStS?

10 11

AN AcTiVe boNNeT uses seNsors To ideNTiFy A collisioN wiTh A pedesTriAN ANd TheN deploys The boNNeT pushiNg iT upwArd To Allow A greATer Time For eNergy AbsorpTioN, ANd To reduce The risk oF iNjury From heAd coNTAcT wiTh The eNgiNe.

ACTIvE BONNET DEPLOYMENTS

Jaguar XF

actiVe boNNet

uNDeployeD

JAguAR xf ACTIvE BONNET DEPLOymENT

All three cars, although similar in their general size, construction and target market, have very different pop up bonnet systems. Both Jaguar and BMW use pyrotechnics and therefore have additional components that are likely to require replacement after of an incorrect deployment. Mercedes use a mechanical system that is electro-mechanically released.

Since this technology is so new, a test device to measure bonnet triggering is still under development. Two exist today and take the form of legs that are self standing and are hit by a moving vehicle. One, the Sensor Leg looks like a human leg and is quite complex, replicating the morphology of an adult leg. The second, known as the PDI leg, represents a child leg, but is visually unlike a human leg.

Thatcham selected three cars from manufacturers that are now fitting these systems. The cars were impacted against these two different leg forms in order to trigger the respective system. The regulatory test protocol requires that active bonnets deploy at speeds between 20km/h and 40km/h, so a test speed of 25km/h was selected.

Thatcham has completed a research project examining

a sample of three cars fitted with active bonnets in order to investigate the efficacy of different systems. The aim was to establish whether the bonnets actually deploy when in collision with a pedestrian, but do not deploy when hitting another car. The tests were also used to measure that amount of time taken for the bonnet to deploy to its fully raised position, as well as to measure the amount of vertical lift.

Jaguar has selected an airbag bonnet deployment system because it is faster in operation, which is shown by the shorter deployment times in the tests. Furthermore, the vertical lift for the Jaguar system is approximately double that of the other systems and so may offer greater protection.

The Jaguar system, however, did not deploy at the 25 km/h test speed, whereas the systems from Mercedes and BMW did. The test was therefore repeated at increments of 5km/h until the system deployed. The Jaguar system eventually deployed at 35km/h with the PDI Leg and 40km/h with the Sensor Leg.

Since the Jaguar design was the first active bonnet on the market, the definition of these test devices was not made. In light of this, the manufacturer is to adapt the sensitivity of the system to trigger at lower thresholds.

The effectiveness of these systems will eventually be shown by real world crash data, although in the meantime, Thatcham’s testing has revealed how the systems deploy.

Leg form make model Impact speed(km/h)

Deploymentstart (ms)front rear

Bonnet fully deployed (ms)front rear

max vertical lift(mm)

Time to deploy(ms)

Sensor Leg Mercedes E-Class 25 20 63 63 43

Jaguar XF 40 23 56 114 33

BMW 5 Series 25 7 22 33 79 60 79

PDI Leg Mercedes E-Class 25 25 69 61 44

Jaguar XF 35 24 56 109 32

BMW 5 Series 25 - - - -

12 13AUTHOR: Dr. Alix Weekes, Lead Research Engineer, Thatcham

AUTHOR: Matthew Avery, Research Manager - Crash & Safety, Thatcham

REPAIRISSuES

Of ACTIvE BONNETSAny impact with a pedestrian is likely to result in a costly repair bill. The dynamics are complex, and the pedestrian can strike and damage many different parts of the car.

However, another more pressing issue is whether the active bonnet systems themselves are more expensive to repair, for example, if the system were falsely activated in a car to car impact (or hitting a wheelie bin) instead of a pedestrian impact. In this case, Thatcham has identified the costs of replacing the necessary parts to bring the system back to working order after deployment.

However, it is important to note that if the system were correctly deployed in a pedestrian impact, there would likely be other costs associated with a pedestrian impact where damage is caused on other parts of the car such as the windscreen, mirrors and roof.

bumper test pedestrian lower leg impact

repair cost (£ incl. Vat)

active bonnet deployment

active bonnet repair cost (£ incl. Vat)

active bonnet deployment

BMW 5-Series 2,828 No 928 Yes

Jaguar XF 3,622 No 1,544 Yes

Mercedes E-Class 5,013 No 0 Yes

If the active bonnet is deployed on the BMW 5-Series, it will cost £928 to replace the pyrotechnics, catches, hinges, and have the fault code re-set. Although the actuators on the BMW 5-Series are similar to the Mercedes E-Class mechanical ones, they must be replaced after any actuation. For the Jaguar XF, the pyrotechnics, hinges and bonnet need replacing and this costs £1,544.

So these are quite expensive systems to repair, if they should incur a false activation. However, all three cars were also put through the RCAR bumper test at low speed, and none of the systems deployed.

The Mercedes E-Class is a different system because it does not need any parts replaced or repaired. The system is easily reset by the driver following the instructions in the manual or on the display screen. The system does not need a fault code reset, so there is no need to take the car to a garage (see the video on the reset procedure at www.thatcham.org/pedestrian).

AUTHOR: Andy Walker, Manager Vehicle Repair Technologies Research, Thatcham

Overall, there is an international need to address the issue of pedestrian casualties according to casualty statistics. It is possible to design bumper systems that can protect both the car and the pedestrian – they are not mutually exclusive. The active bonnet systems are designed to protect pedestrians from injury by raising the bonnet to allow greater energy absorption, whilst still allowing manufacturers to have low bonnet lines for styling purposes.

Thatcham’s testing has revealed that the systems do deploy in a pedestrian type impact, but do not deploy in typical low speed shunts where the system is not needed. The systems are therefore unlikely to result in unnecessary expense to repair, however, the pyrotechnically activated systems from BMW and Jaguar do incur additional repair costs. The Mercedes E-Class, however, has an innovative mechanical system that can be easily reset by the owner, allowing the system to be less sensitive to inadvertent deployments and increased repair costs.

merceDeS e-claSS actiVe boNNet SyStem HaS a zero repair coSt

iN caSe oF aN iNaDVerteNt DeploymeNt

14 15

tHe VeHicle maNuFacturer

liability eXplaiNeD

16 17

EuDC’ IS uSED TO SImuLATE hIghER SPEED CRuISINg

The measurement of HC, CO, and NO emissions, as well as particulate emissions for diesel engines, are a legal mandate, without which no new car can be sold. Those emission targets are laid out in Euro V legislation, and vary depending on the vehicle type (car, van, truck), kerb weight as well as aerodynamic resistance.

So, the European Union wants to reduce the average of all new car CO2 emissions down to 130g/km for 2012, and 95g/km for 2020. The directive to introduce the CO2 targets is Regulation EC 443/2009. Within that document, the timescale for compliance is laid out:

2012 65% of all new cars sold in the EU must emit less than 130g/km CO2

2013 75% of all new cars sold in the EU must emit less than 130g/km CO2

2014 80% of all new cars sold in the EU must emit less than 130g/km CO2

2015 All new cars sold in the EU must emit less than 130g/km CO2

Those simple targets have already induced significant change as vehicle manufacturers prepare for 2012, and will induce far more radical changes within the next decade.

SO, hOW hAS ThE EuROPEAN NEW CAR fLEET DONE OvER ThE PAST DECADE?

The progress has been steady, with distortion from pan European scrappage schemes which favoured B segment cars. One can clearly see the current rate of CO2 reduction progress will probably just meet the 2015 goal, but is off the pace to reach the 95g/km target for 2020.

At the start of 2012, the European Union is introducing new legislation which will make vehicle manufacturers directly responsible for the level of carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions on every new car they produce, along with fines for not meeting the desired target. The target value is 130g/km of CO2 as measured over the emission drive cycle currently used for Euro V, which will also be used for Euro VI. This legislation, in concert with similar initiatives underway right around the globe, has and will continue to be the single biggest driver for vehicle technology change over the next decade.

LET’S LOOk INTO ThE BACkgROuNDFirstly, all values of CO2 are measured using a mathematical derived drive cycle which exists primarily to allow measurement of hydrocarbons (HC), carbon monoxide (CO) and nitric oxide (NO) emissions, as well as particulate emissions for diesel engines. Thus the value is benchmarked against a standardised drive cycle, allowing comparison of values from the smallest to largest passenger car. Importantly, real world driving can alter the absolute emission levels, but currently governments wish to levy taxation based on these values, even though measurement of every new car’s real time emission data will be possible in the very near future.

‘ECE +15’ DRIvE CyCLE

The test is performed in an emission lab between 20˚C and 30˚C with the car fixed to a rolling road dynamometer. Four cycles of ‘ECE + 15’ are completed back to back from a cold start, and finally one cycle of the Extra Urban Drive Cycle (EUDC) is added to represent higher speed cruising.

Time,s

120

100

80

60

40

20

0

0 50 100 150 200

Spe

ed, K

mh

Time,s

120

100

80

60

40

20

0

0 100 200 300 400

Spe

ed, K

mh

Actual (ACEA) 2009 Estimate

90

100

110

120

130

140

150

160

170

180

190

C0

gm

/km

1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

2011

2012

2013

2014

2015

2016

2017

2018

2019

²

Diesel boom

Long term trend

‘Eco-cars’, downsizing stop-start..

160-170

145.9

130 (vehicle)

% compliance to avoid fines

65 8075 100

“ThE SINgLE BIggEST DRIvER fOR vEhICLE TEChNOLOgy ChANgE OvER ThE NExT DECADE”.

18

WhO CARES?Apart from the objective of reducing the amount of fuel used to move vehicles, there are some really severe penalties for the manufacturer who cannot meet the targets – those targets are after all the liability of the vehicle manufacturer related to the type of vehicles they sell. Regulation EC 443/2009 lays out the charging structure for non compliance based on a core levy of 95€ per gram of CO2 over the target, per vehicle sold. There are several formulae depending on the level of excess, but one can see that if a vehicle manufacturer did nothing, their liability would run to billions of Euros per year. The choice would be to either pass that cost onto their customers – an instant commercial disadvantage – or swallow the charge whilst developing a solution.

ThE PENALTIESRegulation EC 443/2009 allows vehicle manufacturers to exclude 40% of production in 2012, rising to full compliance by 2015. It also allows a manufacturer who has a fully compliant range to trade the CO2 latitude with another company that needs CO2 credits. The penalty is applicable across all member states, so that selling high CO2 emitting cars in a single state needs to be offset by lower CO2 emitting cars elsewhere.

Let us consider a manufacturer of luxury vehicles that sells the following vehicles within the European union:

• SUV, 150g/km CO2, 25,000 units per year. Vehicle manufacturer liability - €41,500,000

• Luxury car, 220g/km CO2, 5,000 units per year. Vehicle manufacturer liability - €41,550,000

• Luxury car (hybrid), 45g/km CO2, 500 units per year. Vehicle manufacturer liability - €0

• Where the manufacturer’s average specific emissions of CO2 exceed its specific emissions target by more than 3g CO2/km: (Excess emissions – 3g CO2/km) × 95 €/g CO2/km + 1g CO2/km × 25 €/g CO2/km + 1g CO2/km × 15 €/g CO2/km + 1g CO2/km × 5 €/g CO2/km) × number of new passenger cars.

From 2012, vehicles emitting less than 50g/km CO2 are counted as 3.5 units (2012 and 2013), 2.5 units (2014), 1.5 units (2015) and 1 unit (2016 onwards). So the hybrid vehicles in our example effectively count as 1750 cars in 2012 and 2013 – albeit that they probably could be excluded from the qualifying vehicle count anyway.

22 23

There are two main routes to limit the liability for a vehicle manufacturer – comply or seek a company that has CO2 latitude. Thus we see Daimler AG, for example, spreading its risk by investing in:

• Partnership with Renault Nissan for EV technology and lower cost small engines

• Partnership with Tesla Motors (500 off batch of electric A-class)

• Development of its own technologies (500 off batch of hydrogen fuel cell B-class)

• Sale of Smart ForTwo electric drive (developed in partnership with Zytek)

• Introduction of direct gasoline injection turbocharged engines.

• Introduction of bi turbo 4 cylinder diesel for both E and S-class.

So we can see the mainstream will be to downsize engines which flatters the emission test, and then ‘recover’ performance via cam phasing, variable valve lift, direct high pressure fuel injection as well as advanced dual stage turbo charging. The products are emerging rapidly in preparation for 2012 – Ford with two new turbocharged direct gasoline engines (a third engine range is on the way), Fiat with a turbocharged 900 cm3 twin cylinder petrol engine with 85 bhp (with up to 150 bhp possible).

Because CO2 generation is primarily linked to the acceleration zones of the emission test - as well as real world driving – a major area of activity is to reduce the effect by adding electric motors or flywheel devices to aid acceleration. Furthermore, the fixed match of turbo to engine is being challenged by introducing variable speed drive superchargers. The effect will be to produce the desired power and torque curve from engines substantially smaller than accepted currently.

ThE EffECTGiven the level of penalty, some vehicle manufacturers are more exposed than others. So we can now see that Peugeot-Citroën, Fiat and Renault-Nissan are all well placed by virtue of the smaller vehicles they produce, whilst BMW have spent more than a decade (to date) introducing a package of economy boosting measures. Some ultra luxury and high performance vehicle manufacturers argue that they should be exempt from the legislation, but all attempts to lobby for this change have failed to date.

tHe VeHicle maNuFacturer

liability eXplaiNeD

24 25AUTHOR: ANDREW MARSH, Vehicle Engineering Manager, Thatcham

But the optimisation is spreading far beyond the powertrain. Every aspect of every segment of vehicles is under close scrutiny to see how much can be invested to allow profitable production without incurring CO2 penalties. So the migration of non ferrous metals as well as structural plastics will increase along with ever greater proportions of tempered steel alloys. For example, skin panels have until very recently been pressed from mild steel. Now vehicle manufacturers are reducing skin panel material thickness down towards 0.5mm, but using heat treatment to increase resistance to dents. Thus, whilst the panel weight is reduced, the strength is increased by 25% or so to mitigate increased vulnerability to minor damage. Is the change worth doing? Well on a typical C segment vehicle, the saving is around 20kg, with very little additional investment.

ANyWhERE, ANyWAyThe rather complex array of strategies that flow from Regulation EC 443/2009, combined with Euro V and the imminent Euro VI legislation, will force vehicle manufacturers to pull forward technologies that perhaps could have taken longer to reach the market. Already, vehicle design processes are predominantly simulated, manufacturing has the capability to produce almost any material combination almost anywhere in the world – and now we will see more new technology in the next 10 years than in the past 100 years. For engineers this is all very, very exciting.

ThATChAm fORgE CLOSER LINkS WITh AvCISMost recently, Thatcham has begun working closely with AVCIS (ACPO Vehicle Crime Intelligence Service), investigating current examples of vehicle crime in order to find ways of preventing it. This collaboration has allowed Thatcham instant access to real world theft data statistics for stolen vehicles across the UK. This information can then be collated and as well as being used in future TheftReports, specific vehicles can be identified as having particularly poor security systems. We are also able to establish where poor recovery rates for vehicles exist and highlight any specific security issues. Thatcham and the police can then contact the manufacturers concerned to discuss the way forward in order to prevent any further vehicle theft.

It has been clear for many years now that following the widespread introduction of standard fitment of immobilisers in vehicles, car thieves need access to the vehicle’s keys in order to steal it. As the cold and icy weather approaches, it is becoming evident that vehicle owners are still leaving their vehicles unattended with the engine running for de-icing purposes, making it very easy for the opportunist thief to steal a vehicle. For example, according to AVCIS statistics, 10 cars and vans were stolen in just one day in the West Midlands region.

SECURITYuPDATE

26

For several years, Thatcham has been working with the police to identify crime patterns and trends in order to find solutions to combat vehicle crime.

This year, Thatcham launched Business Desk, a new enquiries service which provides the motor industry with technical information, consultancy services and expert witness reports on security, theft and fraud. The Thatcham ‘TheftReport’ assesses and considers a particular vehicle’s standard security features, its insurance group rating and NVSR star rating, the vehicle’s condition and then looks at statements from the driver and witnesses together with theft and investigation reports in order to conclude how the theft took place.

i n f o v i e w

W I T K i t

S E C U R E K i t

t e c h n i c a l h e l p l i n e

i n t e g r a t e d d i a g n o s t i c s

i n t e g r a t e d m e t h o d s

r e c o g n i s e d i n s t a l l e r

r e c o g n i s e d l o c k s m i t h

v e h i c l e i d e n t i f i c a t i o n s y s t e m

T h a i l a n d L t d

t h e f t r e p o r t

v e h i c l e s e c u r i t y

fARm WATChIn an effort to continue vigilance amongst the farming community against theft of agricultural plant and equipment, AVCIS are introducing a Farm Watch scheme. This will give practical advice to farmers and their operatives as well as landowners on the equipment tested by Thatcham and how best to secure buildings and yards against thieves. Theft of agricultural machines and equipment can be detrimental especially where planting and harvesting are concerned as the equipment is normally specialised and in short supply. For further information on this scheme, please contact [email protected]

AUTHOR: MIKE BRIGGS, Vehicle Security Manager, Thatcham

TRI - vERIfICATION Of AuTOmOTIvE SECuRITy EquIPmENT INSTALLATIONThe effectiveness of any aftermarket vehicle equipment is underpinned by the integrity of its installation. Having long been associated with verifying the quality of the product itself, Thatcham are now building on the work previously administered by the now defunct VSIB (Vehicle Systems Installation Board) in the provision of an additional layer of confidence when assessing the quality and related risk of any aftermarket equipment installation.

Through the creation of a Thatcham administered central database of qualified and verified installers, Thatcham Recognised Installer provides this auditable trail of electronic installation certificates.

Thatcham’s insurer members, represented by the VSSG (Vehicle Security Steering Group), have modified Thatcham’s Vehicle Security Systems Criteria, replacing references to the VSIB with references to TRI, therefore requiring that, in order to obtain the widest possible insurer recognition, those Thatcham Vehicle Security systems covered by the categories listed below, should only be installed by Thatcham Recognised Installers.

Furthermore, VOSA, (Vehicle and Operator Services Agency), the Home Office and ACPO ITS (Association of Chief Police Officers Intelligent Transport Systems) are all supplying their unwavering support to TRI as being the single UK database of vehicle security installations, accessible to both police forces and insurance companies.TRI covers the installation of Thatcham listed aftermarket systems in the following categories:

CAT 1 Electronic Alarm and Immobiliser

CAT 2 Electronic/ Electromechanical Immobiliser

CAT 2-1Electronic Alarm Upgrade

CAT 5 After-Theft Systems for Vehicle Recovery

TqA Tracking systems

The benefits of TRI to insurers, consumers and installers are very clear. The insurer and consumer are provided with a quick and easy guide to competent security aftermarket suppliers and installers in their locality. They are also provided with a valid, independent certificate with brand strength. The installer has confirmation of their quality status as an approved and reliable system supplier and has their company listed on the Thatcham and affiliated websites.

28 29

MEMBER COMPANIESADMIRAL INSURANCE CO LTDAgEAS INSURANCE LTD (formerly fortis insurance ltd)ALLIANZ INSURANCE PLC AMLIN INSURANCE SERVICES ANSVAR INSURANCE CO AVIVA PLCAXA INSURANCE (UK) PLC BRIT INSURANCE LTD CHAUCER INSURANCE CHURCHILL INSURANCE CO LTD CO-OPERATIVE INSURANCE SOCIETY LTD DIRECT LINE INSURANCE PLC ECCLESIASTICAL INSURANCE gROUPEQUITY RED STAR MOTOR POLICIES ESURE INSURANCE LTD gROUPAMA INSURANCE CO LTD HIgHWAY INSURANCE CO LTDINSURANCE CORP OF CHANNEL ISLANDS LTD JUBILEE MOTOR POLICIES AT LLOYD’S KgM UNDERWRITINg AgENCIES LTD LIVERPOOL VICTORIA INSURANCE CO LTD MMA INSURANCE PLC NOVAE INSURANCE CO LTDPROVIDENT INSURANCE PLC QBE INSURANCE CO (UK) LTD RSA PLC SHOO 471 LTD THE NFU MUTUAL INSURANCE SOCIETY LTD UK INSURANCE LTD ZURICH INSURANCE CO

THATCHAM IS A NOT-FOR-PROFIT ORGANISATION

Colthrop Way, Thatcham Berkshire RG19 4NR

Tel: +44 (0)1635 868855Fax: +44 (0)1635 871346 Web: www.thatcham.org

Thatcham Automotive Academy Daytona Drive, Thatcham Berkshire RG19 4ZD

Tel: +44 (0)1635 294806Fax: +44 (0)1635 868863 Web: www.thatcham.org

Thatcham Automotive Academy K4, MIRA Drive, Watling Street Nuneaton CV10 0TU

Tel: +44 (0) 2476 642630Fax: +44 (0) 2476 355737 Web: www.thatcham.org

Thatcham (Thailand) Co., Ltd.2/6 Soi Saithong 2/1 (Tiwanon 45)Tiwanon RoadTambon TasaiMuang DistrictNonthaburi 11100Thailand

Tel: +66 (0)2 951 2818Web: www.thatcham.org

OUR VISION IS THAT GLOBALLY, VEHICLES ARE REPAIRED SAFELY, CRASH INJURIES ARE MINIMISED AND THEFT IS ERADICATED.

HAVE AN OPINION ABOUT OUR PRODUCTS? FEEDBACK HERE: WWW.THATCHAM.ORG/FEEDBACK

JOIN US ON FACEBOOK: WWW.FACEBOOK.COM/THATCHAM

SUBSCRIBE TO OUR RSS FEED: WWW.THATCHAM.ORG