Brevmall VBG Truck Equipment Engelsk

Report from the fourth meeting of the Informal Working group concerning regulation 55 under UNECE GRRF 2013-Apr-11-12

Welcome The workgroup chairman Jürgen Westphäling welcomed all experts to the meeting venue at Tüv-Süd BG- Verkehr in Hamburg. A special welcome was directed to Mr. Günter Bröckling representing the WAP Fahrzeug Technologie in Germany.

Call around the table There were thirteen experts that attended the meeting. Apologizes were received from Mr Turlier of Lohr. Mr Gunneriusson of Swedish Transport Agency did not attend as planned as he fell ill the same day as our meeting started.

Report on the subgroup on Agriculture coupling equipment The Italian group (reported about at the January meeting) has had three meetings around an Italian proposal for Agricultural rules for coupling equipment. We learned during the last meeting that there were also proposals from France. Meanwhile discussions have been held that have resulted in a joint group forming. This group will meet in Essen by TÜV-Nord at the 15th and 16th of May. Sweden informed that they will send a representative from one of the technical services appointed for agricultural equipment to the meeting in Essen. The objective is to merge the proposals from Germany, Italy and France into one proposal. The time frame is short. A final proposal has to be available during this year until 14.06. Currently the target is to include the Agricultural rules into regulation 55. There was a discussion to whether it shall be an annex or a second part. On decision was taken but the preferences seem to be towards a second part.

Report from the GRRF The ToR was processed at the GRRF in February. The proposed ToR was somewhat reworked such that the objective was changed “… prepare a draft proposal in order to correct, include innovative solutions and rules for agricultural equipment. It is anticipated that the will be 2 and possibly 3 proposals from the working group. The first proposal is expected during 2013. The time frame for the informal group is at the latest within two years. The simple item proposals were not processed at this session of the GRRF.

VBG GROUP TRUCK EQUIPMENT AB Telephone Fax Reg. no. Registered office Box 1216 SE-462 28 VÄNERSBORG Sweden +46 521 27 77 00 +46 521 27 77 90 556229-6573 Herman Kreftings gata 4 SE-462 56 VÄNERSBORG 2 Review of the list of items Item 2 Complex(R55_03_09, R55_03_10, R55_03_11, R55_04_05, R55_04_06, R55_04_07) Through the years there have been various attempts to set some rules for odd usage of the coupling equipment. There has been little or no success. Since last meeting Lohr hade send some information on the forces from trailer stabilizers. In the context of category O1 and O2 trailers there have been some initiatives to establish standards for these kinds of applications. A draft standard ISO15263 was outlined but there was no agreement reached. That standard was never published. There is an experimental French standard XPR-18-904-4. What could be drawn from those attempts? Mr. van Ittersum took on the task to put those two documents side by side and try to extract relevant parts. The idea is then to try to compile something that could serve as a basis for some rules on alternative usage of couplings for category O1 and O2. Furthermore Mr. Preud’homme was asked to contact Mr. Pierre Martin of BNA to get some background information to the ISO15263 work failing. Item 3 Complex In the agricultural applications the test force used for the locking device has always been 0.6D according to DLG in Frankfurt. The reasoning for the factor 0.6 is not clear but in agriculture it has always been used. It was agreed that for hook couplings the test force for the opening device shall be 0.6 D. For clevis couplings the test force will remain 0.25D. Item 4 Complex It was recognized that the test procedure for class L drawbar eye has to be adapted to the specific use. When used with a hook type coupling the vertical force is applied at the forward extreme of the ring. When used with a clevis type coupling having a cylindrical bolt the vertical force are applied at the middle points of the ring symmetrically on both side of the bolt. These two different use cases for the class L drawbar ring are not covered in the same test. It is assumed when testing for the hook coupling application the longitudinal force is pulsating between 0.05D and 1.0D. When testing for the clevis coupling application the longitudinal force is alternating between -0.6D and +0.6D. May be this shall be covered in two different classes. There is also an issue how to accommodate the play that you have in these coupling setups. It was agreed that Mr. Preud´homme will outline a proposal including the test conditions for applications of class L drawbar eyes. Item 5 Complex (R55_04_02, R55_04_09) A proposal for a new class W had been outlined in collaboration between Mr. Stokreef and Mr. Svensson. The proposal was in principle accepted but the text needs to be fine-tuned. It was also reminded that the text should account for the requirements in Annex 5 §12.2.1. This task was assigned to Mr. Stokreef and Mr. Svensson. Item 7 Simple Mr. Westphäling had worked out a new proposal. First step of the proposal was to delete §1.5 and §1.5.1 from Annex 5. Second step was to insert those deleted paragraphs after §4.7 in the main text of the regulation. They will then get number §4.8 and §4.8.1 respectively and the current §4.8 will be renumbered §4.9. Finally the words “or drawbeams” are added after the word “brackets” in the first line of the new §4.8. This proposal was agreed. However Mr. Preud´homme expressed some concerns about the wording as their company had some flange type ball couplings that had attachment points integrated into the ball coupling. Hence he argued that their company could not benefit from the integrated attachment point on their flanged ball coupling. The general argument from the group however, was that it is up to the approval authority to approve the drawbeam and the flanged ball coupling together. Mr.Lescail was assigned a task to check up whether there are any thing in the French law that makes such an approval impossible. VBG GROUP TRUCK EQUIPMENT AB Telephone Fax Reg. no. Registered office Box 1216 SE-462 28 VÄNERSBORG Sweden +46 521 27 77 00 +46 521 27 77 90 556229-6573 Herman Kreftings gata 4 SE-462 56 VÄNERSBORG Item 10 Simple Complex Mr. Westphäling had reconsidered the information from last meeting. The result is the all different class C50 coupling definitions will be reworded such that they are referred to as clevis coupling. Hence both clevis couplings and hook couplings are drawbar couplings. This proposal was agreed. Item 11 Simple (R55_04_13, R55_04_14, R55_04_15, R55_04_16) The discussion was first addressing the inconsistencies in the current regulation. In order to get rid of one of those it was agreed to strike out the last part of Annex 5 § 12.3.1. That paragraph shall end “… described in paragraph 12.2.” Then the discussion went on to address the tell-tales of regulation 121 relevant to this item. In this context there was also a discussion about the wording of Annex 5 §12.2.9. That was compared to the §7.6 of the main text. Concerning the usage of colors red and green Mr. Theyssier was looking for a monochrome alternative to compatible with monochrome displays used in the cab of low spec trucks. A short discussion also concerned the interpretation of “green signal”. This was a consequence of the inconsistencies of the regulation. A domination view in the group was that “green” indicates “ready to go”. Furthermore there was a discussion about signaling in the instrument cluster in competition with other highly prioritized safety related signals. Is there a possibility to handle that situation e.g. such that a red or “open coupling” signal may be sufficient to show intermittently. The issue about whether to require the indication to be in the cabin or in the vicinity of the maneuvering or control box did not come to an agreement. It was said without confirmation that indication located in the cab was a legal requirement in Japan. Wireless communication to the indication in the cab was another matter that came up. This might be an option for aftermarket installations. The conclusion of the discussion was that some communication with the OEM was needed. Mr. Theyssier is checking up with his home organization and Mr. Tagliaferri is checking up with IVECO. Then the Annex 5 §12.2 need to get a real makeover. Item 12 Simple () This Item was still not resolved. The hand drawn sketch from last meeting was not yet turned into electronic format. Hence no further discussion took place. Mr. Algüera, Mr. Tagliaferri and Mr. Zander was assigned the task to prepare a sketch in electronic format to the next meeting. Item 13 Complex Mr. Bröckling outlined a proposal how to handle the side force performance of drawbars. This proposal was very similar to what is used in New Zeeland. The details of this proposal will be summarized in a separate document that will be uploaded to the GRRF IWG R55 web page. Mr. Svensson volunteered to make a comparison between the outcomes of the proposal and the New Zeeland rules and the current text of regulation 55. Furthermore some thought will be given in to how to use this in the regulation. Considerations will then be given to the testing (possibly calculation) of the drawbar with respect to the side forces. In this context buckling assessment accounting for manufacturing imperfections is essential. Mr. Westphäling, Mr. Tagliaferri and Mr. Svensson will work out a proposal text for the regulation. Item 14 Complex This item was discussed to some length. The main theme of the discussion was the relation between the 2:d stage manufacturer (body builder) and the chassis manufacturer (OEM). Some examples were brought

VBG GROUP TRUCK EQUIPMENT AB Telephone Fax Reg. no. Registered office Box 1216 SE-462 28 VÄNERSBORG Sweden +46 521 27 77 00 +46 521 27 77 90 556229-6573 Herman Kreftings gata 4 SE-462 56 VÄNERSBORG 4 up. The Lohr structure using a fifth wheel and two additional fixing points was one example. Some mobile homes design were other examples where the base chassis are extended. A vital point is the interface that the body builder instructions [BBI] of the OEM, represents. Application that are within the BBI is ok when agreed with the OEM. Applications outside the BBI are Not OK and need further investigations. This situation of course requires more competence at the body builder. There is also a need for a publically available clearance of responsibility between body builder and OEM. §3.2.3 and §3.2.8 of the main text requires the OEM to supply information of fixing points for towing equipment and the capacity of those fixing points. It is then up to the body builder to show that that information is accounted for. The conclusion from this discussion was that this is a responsibility of the approving authority to control. The relevant information shall be available, the body builder will become a manufacturer 2. Stage for the masses and dimensions and the mounting of couplings. Until today such a system approval is not known!. This item was then cancelled from the list of ietems. It was agreed to cancel this item from the list. Item 20 Complex (R55_02_13, R55_04_08, R55_04_12) There is not yet any comprehensive information available on how different countries handle extreme loads and reduced speed. Most countries have some maximum allowable speed stated in the law for extreme loads. Germany has a procedure an a formulae to adapt the D-value calculation for heavy transports. It was also said that apart from the German TA 31 guideline there was a TÜV “Merkblatt” concerning the same subject. In general Mr. Algüera described the procedure for extreme loads to be such in Germany that.: 1. The equipment manufacturer issues a certificate concerning the individual transport set up 2. “TÜV” endorses the certificate 3. KBA issues an approval for the transport set-up. As an example Mr. Algüera further mentioned that special tests are performed to support the certificate. Such is the case with the Rockinger 56 coupling that has been tested for extreme static loads. To progress this item a number of actions were agreed: 1. Investigate the UNECE R54 (tyres) for the consideration of speed there in. 2. Investigate how axle manufacturers treat axle load an reduced speed. 3. A procedure used for a long time by VBG shall be applied a posteriori to historic certificates or recommendations issued by other manufacturers, Jost/Rockinger, Pommier, Orlandi, SAF/Holland 4. Make a try to see how the Germans procedure of TA31 and the provisions in the CARLOS- testing could be integrated in to the regulation 55 Item 21 Complex (R55_04_11) This item is not straight forward to address. The document R55-04-11 includes a proposal how the inclusion of European Modular System vehicle combinations could be made. I was agreed that all members of the working group shall read this document to enable a discussion at the next meeting. It was also noted that there is a difference between type approval requirements and requirements for application in use. This raises the question whether this an issue for type approval at all. However the first idea is to add these provisions in §5.3.5.x of the main text. A second thought to consider is to make a separate annex for this matter. Item 22 Complex (R55_04_03) Since last meeting Mr. Turlier had made some work on this matter. Among his efforts were fatigue theoretical estimates. These showed that special care should be exercised to treat the trade-off between support load and dynamic vertical load. In case the critical areas of the design (from a fatigue perspective) are under compressive stress when only support load is applied then a lowering of the support load would VBG GROUP TRUCK EQUIPMENT AB Telephone Fax Reg. no. Registered office Box 1216 SE-462 28 VÄNERSBORG Sweden +46 521 27 77 00 +46 521 27 77 90 556229-6573 Herman Kreftings gata 4 SE-462 56 VÄNERSBORG be counterproductive. In general the proposal won support and Mr. Svensson was given the task to in collaboration with Mr. Turlier make proposal formulation of regulation text. Mr. Westphäling agreed to send to the secretary the German FS5. Item 24 Complex () So far no statistics has been made available through the industry. Mr. Stokreef reported that there was no statistics within the RDW. There is some statistics on deformations observed at PTI. Mr. Tagliaferri declared that Italy was not against investigating an idea to introduce some requirements for rubbing plates based on the standard ISO1726. In fact uneven force distribution due to too flexible rubbing plates may cause breakage of the fifth wheels. Mr. Alüera and Mr. Tagliaferri were assigned the task to consult the CLCCR technical committee concerning this proposal. Item 25 Complex Since last meeting it had been clarified that the standard ISO11407 set the vertical articulation angle to 6 degrees or more. Germany has a limit for the vertical articulation of three degrees and Sweden has 6 degrees. Representatives from other countries had not been able to find any national limits. It was noted that the original proposal from The Netherlands addressed full trailers only. Mr. Stokreef took on the task to elaborate the proposal to include center axle trailers and semi-trailers. The recommendation from the group was that for these categories of trailers the minimum vertical articulation angle shall be set to 3 degrees. It was noted that the clearance between boxes on the truck and the trailer in the case of full trailer may put stiffer restrictions on the articulation angles. Item 26 Complex This information is vital for aftermarket installations. Mr. Stokreef had made a comprehensive study of the regulation with respect to fixing points. There are several points in the regulation where requirements for this information are implicitly demanded from the OEM. However there is room for clarifications. Mr. Stokreef and Mr. Ittersum were assigned the task to outline a proposal for regulation text. Item 29 Complex (R55_04_04) Mr. Svensson presented two different approaches how to put up requirements to enable a strict definition of a rigid drawbar as being a separate technical unit to which the R55 applies or as being an integrated part of the chassis for which the technical properties are the responsibility of the manufacture. The first concept was based on eigenfrequencies (or stiffness) and the second was based on the task that the drawbar actually performs. None of these got any applause. The discussion the turned into other possible principles as the base for a definition. What is in the standard ISO1761 is very much a gut feeling principle. This may result in a great variation of classification depending on who’s gut feeling that is applied. Mr. Ittersum proposed a definition such that if the drawbar is available as a spare part then it is to be considered as a separate technical unit. Some argued the definition should be that all rigid drawbars are Integrated part of the chassis. No agreement was reached. Item 30 Complex (R55_02_09, R55_03_06) This item was not discussed to any depth. Detailing remains to be done.

VBG GROUP TRUCK EQUIPMENT AB Telephone Fax Reg. no. Registered office Box 1216 SE-462 28 VÄNERSBORG Sweden +46 521 27 77 00 +46 521 27 77 90 556229-6573 Herman Kreftings gata 4 SE-462 56 VÄNERSBORG 6 Close of the meeting The chairman thanked all participating experts for their contribution and wished them a safe journey home. Welcome back in October of 2013. Likewise the attendees expressed their gratitude for the hospitality by BG-Verkehr to host the meeting. The next meeting will be held in Paris at the BNA on the 17th to 18th of October 2013.

Resolutions and actions

No Description Time Actor Closed . 1 Item list in ToR extended with two items. 2012 Oct 11 Svensson Yes 29. Integrated drawbar, 30. Simple drawbar 2 The German TA 31 sent to the secretary 2012 Oct 11 Conrad Yes 3 TûV-Nord procedure on rigid drawbars sent to 2012 Oct 11 Conrad the secretary 4 Invite Lucien Vogel of Lohr to the group 2012 Oct 11 Preud´homme Yes 5 Invite German trailer manufacturers to the 2012 Oct 11 Westphäling Yes group 6 Invite other trailer manufacturers through 2012 Oct 11 Svensson Yes CLCCR 7 Invite representatives from UTAC to the 2012 Oct 11 Preud´homme Yes group 8 Investigate further experts to the agricultural 2012 Oct 11 All Yes subgroup 9 Item 6, Collect further information on locking 2012 Oct 11 van Ittersum Yes of foldable class A couplings 10 Item 7, In principle agreed but formulation 2012 Oct 11 Westphäling, Yes shall be reconsidered. Stokreef 11 Item 8, Agreed without modifications 2012 Oct 11 Yes 12 Item 10, No agreement reached, reclassified as 2012 Oct 11 Decided Yes complex. 13 Item 11, Proposal agreed in principle. Mr. 2012 Oct 11 Teyssier, Teyssier of Volvo volunteered to reconsider Tagliaferri the formulation. Mr. Tagliaferri offered his support. 14 Item 12, The drawings proposed needed 2012 Oct 11 Zander Yes improvement. The justification is required to be better founded in the statistics. 15 Item 17, Agreed 2012 Oct 11 Yes 16 Item 18, Proposal was agreed. The 2012 Oct 11 Yes formulation does cover fully automatic coupling systems. 17 Item 23, Proposal disagreed and withdrawn 2012 Oct 11 Yes 18 Item 22, Proposal supported and Mr. Svensson 2012 Oct 11 Svensson Yes was assigned the task to elaborate the proposal VBG GROUP TRUCK EQUIPMENT AB Telephone Fax Reg. no. Registered office Box 1216 SE-462 28 VÄNERSBORG Sweden +46 521 27 77 00 +46 521 27 77 90 556229-6573 Herman Kreftings gata 4 SE-462 56 VÄNERSBORG 19 Item 2, No agreement was reached at this time 2012 Oct 11 Westphäling Yes more information on accident statistics needed 20 Item 2, AL-KO to send internal procedure to 2012 Oct 11 Jaumouille Mr. Westphäling 21 Item 2, TÜV-Rheinland to send internal 2012 Oct 11 ? procedure to Westphäling 22 Item 2, Try to get documentation on the Dutch 2012 Oct 11 Stokreef automobile club procedures and send to Westphäling 23 Item 13, Support but further information 2012 Oct 11 Svensson Yes wanted. Contact Mr. Bonacker for more background. 24 Item 3, Proposal in principle agreed. More 2012 Oct 11 Westphäling, Yes information on mechanism required. Svensson Westphäling contacts DLG. Svensson contacts (Challenge to all Mr. Bonacker. experts) 25 Item 4, Pommier is invited to outline a new 2012 Oct 11 Preud´homme class L2 intended for use with pin type couplings with cylindrical (prismatic) pin. 26 Items agreed at the 2012 Oct 10-11 will be 2012 Oct 11 Westphäling, Yes formalized in a working document for the Svensson GRRF session 2013 Feb 27 Next meeting to be held in Garching 2013 Jan 2012 Oct 11 Yes 15-16 28 Italian UNACOMA to prepare a proposal for 2013 Jan 16 Westphäling Yes agricultural couplings 29 Simple items will go in the current series of 2013 Jan 16 Decided Yes amendments. 30 No transition period needed for the simple 2013 Jan 16 Decided Yes items 31 Handle both ball and pin couplings in the 2013 Jan 16 Westphäling Yes context of secondary coupling. New proposal. 32 Introduce clevis in the definition of Class C 2013 Jan 16 Westphäling Yes clearing out ambiguities. New proposal 33 Further detail the requirement for remote 2013 Jan 16 Tagliaferri, indication. New proposals. Teyssier 34 Distribute new sketches on free space 2013 Jan 16 Westphäling definition. 35 Comment on the new sketches for free space 2013 Jan 16 All 36 Proposal for item 17 adjusted 2013 Jan 16 Decided Yes 37 Further elaborate on the trade-off proposal, 2013 Jan 16 Turlier, Svensson VBG GROUP TRUCK EQUIPMENT AB Telephone Fax Reg. no. Registered office Box 1216 SE-462 28 VÄNERSBORG Sweden +46 521 27 77 00 +46 521 27 77 90 556229-6573 Herman Kreftings gata 4 SE-462 56 VÄNERSBORG 8 aiming for a straight line 38 Send the German documented procedure FS5 2013 Jan 16 Westphäling to the secretary 39 Start outline requirements for auxiliary usage 2013 Jan 16 van Ittersum of coupling equipment. 40 Supply information on force level from 2013 Jan 16 Turlier, Yes coupling brakes. van Ittersum, Preud ´home, Westphäling, Jaumouille 41 Investigate the outcome from the changed 2013 Jan 16 Svensson rules for drawbar lateral forces in NewZeeland 42 Coupling in existing classes developed to 2013 Jan 16 Decided Yes become fully automatic coupling remain in the original class. 43 Outline a new Class W for coupling systems 2013 Jan 16 Svensson, Yes of unique concept. Draw on the Class T when Gunneriusson outlining the definition 44 Review Annex 7 §1.5.2 2013 Jan 16 Algüera Yes 45 Investigate and compile statistics concerning 2013 Jan 16 Stokreef, Hansen, king-pin and supporting structure in semi- Gunneriusson, trailers. Bailey,Preud ´home, Tagliaferri 46 Investigate and compile information on 2013 Jan 16 Stokreef, Hansen, Yes limiting articulation angles for coupling Gunneriusson, equipment as installed on the vehicles Bailey,Turlier, Erario/Tagliaferri 47 Item 2, Put the ISO15263DIS and French 2013 Apr 12 van Ittersum experimental standard XPR-18-904-4 side by side and try to extract relevant parts. 48 Item 2, Contact Mr. Pierre Martin of BNA to 2013 Apr 12 Preud’homme get some background information to the ISO15263 work failing. 49 Item 4, Outline a proposal including the test 2013 Apr 12 Preud´homme conditions for applications of class L drawbar eyes with pin couplings. 50 Item 5, Finalize a proposal text for Class W 2013 Apr 12 Stokreef, Svensson 51 Item 7, Check-up whether there are anything 2013 Apr 12 Lescail in the French law that makes an integrated approval of coupling and drawbeam impossible.

52 Item 11, Communicate with the OEM about 2013 Apr 12 Teyssier, the implementation of indication in the Tagliaferri instrument cluster. Consider also monochrome

VBG GROUP TRUCK EQUIPMENT AB Telephone Fax Reg. no. Registered office Box 1216 SE-462 28 VÄNERSBORG Sweden +46 521 27 77 00 +46 521 27 77 90 556229-6573 Herman Kreftings gata 4 SE-462 56 VÄNERSBORG options. 53 Item 13, Outline an alternative regulation 2013 Apr 12 Westphäling, text/requirements for lateral force Tagliaferri, performance of drawbars. Svensson 54 Item 14, Cancelled from the item list 2013 Apr 12 Yes 55 Item 20, Investigate the UNECE R54 (tyres) 2013 Apr 12 Svensson for the consideration of speed there in. 56 Item 20, Investigate how axle 2013 Apr 12 Svensson manufacturers treat axle load an reduced speed. 57 Item 20, A procedure used for a long time 2013 Apr 12 Algüera, by VBG shall be applied a posteriori to Tagliaferri, historic certificates or recommendations Feltham, issued by other manufacturers, Preud’homme Jost/Rockinger, Pommier, Orlandi, Svensson SAF/Holland 58 Item 20, Make a try to see how the Germans 2013 Apr 12 Westphäling, procedure of TA31 and the provisions in Svensson the CARLOS-testing could be integrated in to the regulation 55 59 Item 22, Outline a regulation text proposal to 2013 Apr 12 Turlier, incorporate Dc vs. V trade-off Svensson 60 Item 24, Contact CLCCR-TC concerning 2013 Apr 12 Algüera, rubbing plate deformations and any damage Tagliaferri caused thereof. 61 Item 25, Outline requirements on articulation 2013 Apr 12 Stokreef angles in-use including center axle trailers and semi-trailers. 62 Item 26, Outline a regulation text proposal for 2013 Apr 12 Stokreef requirements on information on fixing points. 63 64

VBG GROUP TRUCK EQUIPMENT AB Telephone Fax Reg. no. Registered office Box 1216 SE-462 28 VÄNERSBORG Sweden +46 521 27 77 00 +46 521 27 77 90 556229-6573 Herman Kreftings gata 4 SE-462 56 VÄNERSBORG