china ncap updates
TRANSCRIPT
C-NCAP UpdatesC-NCAP Management Center
Review for decade of C-NCAP1
2 Introduction of 2018 version
August 29,2006
Over 300 vehicle types have been evaluated in the past 10 years
2018 version
9.1%
25%
26.1%
37.5%
2.3%
2star
3 stars
4 star
5 star
5star+
result of 2006 protocol result of 2009 protocol
56%21%
17%
6%3stars
4stars 5stars
5stars+
result of 2012 protocol
73.8%
18%
3.3%4.9%3 star
4 star
5 star
2 star
Numbers of 4- and 5-star cars keep increasing
Organize auto safety tour around China for consecutive 10 years
Promoted UN Decade of Action in China
National Traffic Safety Day
Active Participation of International Communication
Review for decade of C-NCAP1
2 Introduction of 2018 version
• Adjust chest index• Quantitative evaluation of
submarine• Adjust whiplash test• Abolish bonus points for
ISOFIX and safety belt reminder on driver side
• Adjust rating system
C-NCAP launched in 2006
2012 version
2006 version
2015 version
2009 version
2018 version
• Whiplash test• Higher offset test speed• Quantitative evaluation of
rear seat occupants• Bonus point for ESC• New rating system
• Rear seat dummy in side impact test
• Child dummy • New barrier in side impact test• Higher whiplash test speed• Stricter requirements for bonus point of air curtain• Bonus point for safety belt reminder of rear seats• Increased weight of rear seat dummy• Pedestrian protection • AEB system• New rating system
Test item:1.100% frontal
impact2. 40% OBD3. Side impact
(new barrier to be adopted)
4. Whiplash test (increased speed)
Bonus point:
1. Side air curtain (stricter requirements)
2. Safety belt reminder (requirements for rear seats)
Occupant
protection
Active
safety
Pedestrian
protection
Headform test
Legform test
—upper leg
—lower leg
AEB Rear end― Target vehicle
at low speed― Target vehicle
in stationary― Target vehicle
in braking Pedestrian− Offside
crossing in daytime
− Nearside crossing in daytime
Bonus point for ESC
Electric
safety
Anti shock
—Insulation resistance at battery side
—Any one out of the rest four
Leakage of electrolyte
REESSEV/Hybrid vehicleEV/Hybrid vehicle
Conventional vehicleConventional vehicle
2015 version
2018 version
WAD1700
40km/h , 50 °40km/h , 65 °3.5kg child headform4.5kg adult headform
Free fly, 40km/h
75mm
or
WAD2100
Legform test
Headform test
Height of lower end of bumper
AEB-CCR Target vehicle in stationary, target vehicle
at low speed and target vehicle in braking HMI and malfunctioning Setting of weight of each scenario
AEB-VRU-pe
Nearside and offside crossing in daytime
Determine the weight of various speeds in terms of injury distribution and injury severity
Scenario
Test item
Target vehicle in stationary
Target vehicle at low speed
Target vehicle in braking
AEB FCW AEB FCW AEB FCW
Scenario
20kph 35kph 30kph 50kph 12m 12m30kph 45kph 45kph 60kph 40m 40m40kph 55kph 65kph 75kph
75kph
Speed of target vehicle: 20kph
Speed of target vehicle
and test vehicle: 50kph
4m/s2
No effects to the existing evaluation system for conventional vehicle
In consideration of the hazard of high-voltage in battery and circuit, additional test to be adopted
Compliance of vehicles after impact tests with the requirements for electric safety to be tested
More stringent requirements than those in Chinese standards to be applied
Independent mark to be applied for indicating the level of electric safety
In case of failing to meet the electric safety requirements, only the test results will be released and no star rating will be conducted.
EV/Hybrid Vehicle Evaluation
Requirements in GB/T31498
Anti shock
——The insulation resistance must
meet relevant requirements. Any one of the
rest four shall meet the requirements. Electrolyte leakage REESS
Requirements specified in C-NCAP protocol are more stringent than those in GB/T31498.
EV/Hybrid Vehicle Evaluation
Low-voltage Electricity Physical protection Insulation resistance
on loading side
Insulation resistance on battery side
BOX Category Item Points
BOX Total
Scoring rateWeig
ht Scoring rate 最终得分
Front Rear
Occupant protection
Evaluated through test
100% frontal
16 4
70BOX scoring/BOX
total0.7 ×70%
Final scoring (scoring
rate)
40% OBD 16 4Side impact 16 4Whiplash 5
Bonus
Side airbag+curtain
3
Safety belt reminder
2
+Pedestrian protection
Evaluated through test
头型 1215
BOX scoring/BOX total
0.15 ×15%腿型 3 +Active safety
Bonus ESC 4
15
(ESC scoring + AEB
scoring×configuration rate)/BOX total
0.15 ×15%Evaluated through test
AEB追尾 8
AEB行人 3
Score distributionScore distribution
Configuration rateConfiguration rate
Item Requirements Configuration
coefficient
ESC No requirements
AEB
Test vehicle with AEB 1
Test vehicle without AEB
A≥25% 1
25% > A≥15% 0.8
15% > A≥5% 0.6
A < 5% 0
Note:
A—proportion of sales volume of configurations equipped with AEB in the total sales volume of the vehicle type. It is set in terms of the forecast average installation rate and future trend on the market.
Optional installation is not considered. OEM provides configuration list and sales volume. AEB must be standard configuration and C-NCAP Management Center will verify the list provide by OEM.
Star Rating and Minimum Scoring RateStar Rating and Minimum Scoring Rate
Star Rating and Scoring Rate
Minimum Scoring
Occupant Protection
Pedestrian Protection
Active Safety
2018 2019 2020
5+ 95% 95% 75% 50% 55% 72%
5 85% 85% 70% 26% 38% 55%
4 75% 75% 60% / / /
3 60% 65% 50% / / /
2 45% 55% 40% / / /
1 < 45% < 55% < 40% / / /
Test vehicles in place
Notification to vehicle manufacturers
Pedestrian
protection test (5 w
orking days)
Release of final results
Final results
C-NCAP test
Preparation for pedestrian protection test (30 working
days)
AEB test (7-10
working days)
Crash test and
whiplash test (5
working days)
Feedback of pedestrian protection
parameters by vehicle
manufacturers (5 working
days)