****************** BRUSSELS, 19 OCTOBER 2015 PLACE: AB 4B 10H00-13H00

Transcription

1 EUROPEAN COMMISSION INTERNAL MARKET, INDUSTRY, ENTREPRENEURSHIP AND SMEs DIRECTORATE-GENERAL Industrial Transformation and Advanced Value Chains Automotive & Mobility Industries Working Group on "Motor Vehicles" Brussels, 7 December 2015 GROW/C/4 AL SUMMARY REPORT MVWG SUBGROUP ON MASSES AND DIMENSIONS ****************** BRUSSELS, 19 OCTOBER 2015 PLACE: AB 4B 10H00-13H00 Documents can be downloaded from the CIRCABC group: 1. Approval of the draft agenda; The draft agenda was approved. 2. Approval of the summary report of the Working Group "Motor Vehicles" subgroup on Masses and Dimensions held on 2 July 2015; No comment was made on the summary report. 3. Consideration of a draft amendment to Regulation (EC) 1230/2012 on the approval of vehicles with regard to their mass and dimensions; CLEPA raised 5 main issues to be tackled for rear flaps (PPT available on CIRCABC): maximum length for folded aerodynamic devices (to be included into Regulation (EC) 1230/2012), width for aero devices to be included in the upcoming implementing act of Directive 96/53/EEC, Rear underrun protection (UNECE Regulation 58), Rear lights and reflectors (UNECE Regulation No 48). DG MOVE informed the group that the implementing act of Directive 96/53/EEC would be presented for vote to the Land transport Committee on 30 October Articles The group reviewed the draft amendment to Regulation (EC) No 1230/2012. ACEA and CLCCR volunteered to check the definitions introduced for wheelbase for the next meeting. It was agreed to include an article introducing new Annex V on the approval of aerodynamic devices. Commission européenne, B-1049 Bruxelles / Europese Commissie, B-1049 Brussel - Belgium. Telephone: (32-2)

2 Annex I It was agreed to delete the reference to containers and swap bodies in the maximum width as these elements are not part of the vehicles, but load. CLCCR volunteered to make a proposal to specify which bodywork code shall be used for conditioned bodies. It was agreed to accept numeric simulations instead of tests for manoeuvrability subject to the agreement of the type-approval authorities. The group accepted also the ACEA request to use simulation for manoeuvrability requirements of heavy duty motor vehicles as it is proposed for trailers. The Commission will check whether the annex of the framework directive on virtual testing should also be amended. Formula for manoeuvrability of trailers: Italy will look at a possible alternative. Participants were asked to check whether the formula could apply to vehicle fitted aerodynamic devices It was agreed to include the UK proposal requiring that the aerodynamic devices should also be deployed for the Rear-swing out test as well as for all manoeuvrability requirements. Table 1 and table 2 of Appendix 1 to Annex I The CLCCR proposal (M&D-02-02) amending the conditions under which couplings and lighting equipment are taken into account for the vehicle length and width was accepted. The proposal for 300 mm for folded flaps for vehicles not used for combined transport was not accepted (200mm was considered enough+same rules for all vehicles). CLCCR (supported by Sweden) also proposed to allow more projections for devices for securing the tarpaulin as it was the case before Regulation (EC) No 1230/2012(proposal: 50 mm below 2 m and 100 mm above 2 m). AT could not support because of concerns with tunnels. AT could support 30 mm (standard projection for the devices 28 mm) at a height below 2 m, 50 mm between 2 m and 3.7 m and 2.65m for the maximum vehicle width (same wording as row 17 on safety railings). The Chair proposed to use 50 mm projection together with a limitation at 2.65 m for the vehicle width. Row 11 of table 2 (aerodynamic devices for the width of the vehicle) was amended to apply to Heavy duty vehicles only. It was agreed to delete row 18 of Table 2 as aerodynamic devices are already covered by row 11. New Annex V (approval of aerodynamic devices as separate technical unit or component) The group agreed that the type-approval requirements would only apply to aerodynamic devices above 500 mm as it was required by Directive (EU) 2015/719. On the requirements relating to the capability of the aerodynamic devices to stay in their folded position when exposed to winds up to 160 km/h, CLEPA volunteered to look at alternative requirements (e.g. force level). CLEPA was in favour of keeping the full freedom for the design of the automatic deployment of flaps. The Commission recalled the rule of the Vienna Convention that the driver shall always keep the control of his vehicle. 2

3 The request from ECF to prevent that flaps deploy automatically below 50 km/h was accepted. It was agreed to not specify a speed under the which the devices shall retract/fold automatically. The Commission will check the right wording for the warning signal in paragraph 3.2. based on the standard practice. The group agreed to limit the length of devices to 2 m because of possible incompatibilities with other pieces of legislation. AT proposed to amend para (rear underrun protection) to require that in case of crash, the aerodynamic devices do not touch the windscreen of an M1 vehicle coming from the rear. CLEPA was asked to provide a force at which the devices shall collapse/retract. The group discussed whether these devices should be approved as separate technical unit (STU) or components especially for retrofitted vehicles. This issue is linked to the way the installation of aerodynamic devices on vehicles will be checked at national level. As an example the installation will be checked through an individual approval in AT whereas it will left to the vehicle owner in the UK to ensure aerodynamic devices are properly installed. The Chair suggested that such installation could also be checked during periodical technical inspections. AT supported by CLEPA and ACEA proposed that instead of a list of vehicles (STU concept), the vehicle characteristics or vehicle structure could be used: e.g. strength of the chassis, electrical connection, energy source, pressurized air, CAN bus, etc. FR recalled that to a model for marking and an information document was necessary in any case. The group agreed to further investigate this for the next meeting and look for instance at what was done for Regulation 58 (rear under run protection). The Commission agreed to check whether the requirements on lighting systems should be part of the component/stu or its installation. ANNEX VI (Information document) The group agreed that an information document was necessary for the approval of aerodynamic devices as separate technical units/components. A placeholder was foreseen in the draft text. The group agreed that the mass of alternative technology needed to be included in the information document and the CoC in a more precise way. The Commission will also look at possible requirements in the core text. ACEA considered that the mass of each version (a matrix shall be provided) may be too burdensome. The Chair recalled that this proposal was made to bring in line the wording of the information document of Regulation (EC) 1230/2012 with the wording already used in Annex I to Directive 2007/46/EC. It was recalled that in accordance with the footnote of this paragraph, these requirements do not apply to heavy duty vehicles. 4. Next steps; Experts were invited to send additional written comments by 6 November 2015 (antony.lagrange@ec.europa.eu). The Commission services will prepare for the next meeting a revised proposal taking into account the comments received. Experts were invited to also send written comments for the discussion on the front of the trucks. If time allows it, this could also be discussed at the next meeting. 3

4 5. AOB; No point was discussed under AOB. 4

5 ANNEX I LIST OF PARTICIPANTS MEMBER STATES Austria France Germany Italy Latvia Poland Spain Sweden United Kingdom Franz Wurst Marine Molina Antoine Pamard LeifErik Meyer-Truelsen Luca Rocco Kristine Vilka Wojciech Przybylski Katarzyna Mizgajska-Kępa Jose Luis Garcia Carlos Lujan Anders. Gunneriusson David Adams ORGANISATIONS AND ASSOCIATIONS CER ACEA CLCCR Lorenzo Volpi Ilja Christine Buck Matin Burgat David Leidig Seppo Karvonen Erwin Kirschner Uwe Toppel Romain Jolivet Ben Van Rose ECF CLEPA EUROPEAN COMMISSION DG GROW, Unit C4 Ceri Woolsgrove Christophe Adam Pierre Laurent Gander Van Raemdonck Antony Lagrange (Chair) 5