There are two fundamentally different dynamic side impact regulations in existence currently, namely FMVSS 214 in the USA and ECE Reg 95 in Europe. An earlier benefit study showed that both these regulations would be cost-beneficial if applied in Australia. Subsequently, Australia mandated a new Australian Design Rule ADR72 that calls for all new passenger cars to comply with one of two existing dynamic side impact regulations by 1999. There is general agreement around the world that it is undesirable to have two different regulations for side impact protection and that they need to be harmonised. A proposal for a hybrid side impact regulation was developed in Australia and a series of crash tests performed which demonstrated superior crash performance outcomes over the two existing regulations. This benefit study was conducted to revise the previous estimates of FMVSS 214 and ECE Reg 95 in the light of more recent evidence and to estimate the Harm benefits of the new hybrid standard. The results show that while the previous Harm reduction figures were slightly over-stated, they are still nevertheless likely to be cost-beneficial. More importantly, though, the hybrid proposal has the potential to provide far superior Harm reductions in side impacts to either of the two existing standards and would overcome the difficulty of having different side impact standards in different continents. (A)
Abstract