WPC 2' BJ Zzurier#|d ʡ&d H@7X@HP LaserJet 4LHPLAS4L.PRS4d H@g.;\x/[X@KW .,., USUK 3'3'Standard6&6&StandardrJet 4LVfzư 42Y[kz#|d,USUK 3'3'Standard6&6&StandardHPLAS4L.PRS4d Hzư Courier2`WY+Letter GothicQMPS410.PRSd H@g.;hhhhX@KWLetter GothicCourier3'Standard6&6&StandardQMPS410.PRSd HKW 2XFZ\1ddd,ʡ&d H@7X@lr5ddd, d6X@`7@@wb~+ Adobe Garamond BoldAdobe Garamond Bold ItalicAdobe Garamond ItaAdobe Garamond RegularAdobe Garamond SemiboldAdobe Garamond Semibold ItalicHelv#d H@g.;ʡX@#4  #d6X@`7 @# PP ` X X "X(X.X``4X:X@hhFTRANS/WP.29/GRB/19" PP X X "(.``4:@phhFpage "h 0 TRANS/WP.29/GRB/19 page  0 T    FF  N N %+VV17= Distr.I XFF XX XN N X%X+XVV1X7X= RESTRICTED# XFF #F XFF XX XN N X%X+XVV1X7X= TRANS/WP.29/GRB/19 */# XFF XX XN N X%X+XVV1X7X= 26 April 1994 X^^CXIXOXf!f!UX##[##[##[##[##[## FF  N N %+VV17= Original: ENGLISH INLAND TRANSPORT COMMITTEE Working Party on the Construction of Vehicles Meeting of Experts on Noise  +   REPORT OF THE MEETING OF EXPERTS ON NOISE N'ON ITS TWENTYFIRST SESSION ((21 and 22 February 1994) 1.The Meeting of Experts on Noise held its twentyfirst session on 21February (afternoon only) and 22 February 1994 under the chairmanship of Mr.K.F. Ditsch (Germany). Experts from the following countries participated in the work: Belgium; Czech Republic; Denmark; Finland; France; Germany; Hungary; Italy; Poland; Russian Federation; Spain; Switzerland; United Kingdom; United States of America. Representatives of Japan took part in the session under paragraph 11 of the Commission's Terms of Reference. Experts from the following non-governmental organizations also participated: International Road Federation (IRF); International Organization of Motor Vehicle Manufacturers (OICA); International Motorcycle Manufacturers Association (IMMA); European Tyre and Rim Technical Organization (ETRTO). /__________ J ddx !+dx`" J    The distribution of documents of the Inland Transport Committee and its subsidiary bodies is limited. They are distributed only to governments, to specialized agencies and to governmental and nongovernmental organizations which take part in the work of the Committee and of its subsidiary bodies, and should not be given to newspapers or periodicals. `" */The document symbol is the continuation of TRANS/SC.1/WP.29/... following the decision of the Inland Transport Committee at its fiftysixth 4session (ECE/TRANS/103, para. 78). GE.94 /grb.19 (E),p-p-p-Ԍ4 T|  + Й2.PPThe documents without a symbol distributed during the session are listed in annex 1 to this report. TYREROAD NOISE MEASUREMENT Documentation: TRANS/SC1/WP29/GRB/R.112; TRANS/SC1/WP29/GRB/R.115 and Add.1; informal documents 1, 4, 5, 6 and 7 of annex 1 to this report. 3.PPThe Chairman informed the Meeting of Experts that the discussion of the tyrenoise limitation in the ERGANOISE 3 group of the European Commission was still in progress and the proposal tabled by France (informal document No. 5) for the coastby measurement procedure was under consideration for the technical adaptation of Directive 92/23/EEC, with the limit value of 75 to 76dB(A) for car tyres. He also said that such a limit would exclude approximately 20 per cent of current car tyre models. 4.PPThe expert from Germany gave a presentation of the tyreroad noise tests of a large number of tyres of different sizes and makes, on the test track ISO/DIS10 844, made by coastby method with a trailer, and measurement in the farfield (7.5 metres). Noise characteristics on other road surfaces were also checked. However, he reported that in the measurements it had been difficult to eliminate the noise of the towing vehicle and also the spread of results was larger. These conclusions led the ERGANOISE 3 group to the decision not to use the trailer method, but to carry out the measurement on the vehicle (informal document No.5). Information was also given on the research carried out with the truck tyres, where, however, the considerations in ERGANOISE 3 still continued, due to high influence of the noise values by torque transmitted by the tyre (up to 9 dB(A)). In the exchange of views which followed the presentation, particular attention was paid to the influence of measuring conditions and to the proposed correction factors. 5.PPThe expert from the United Kingdom introduced informal document No. 1 giving results of research of the correlation between the coastby noise and adhesion properties of tyres. In the discussion, the Chairman of the Meeting indicated that in the ERGANOISE 3 the safety implications of imposing the tyre noise limits would also be observed. Expecting that more results from that work would already be available at the next session, the Chairman proposed that the tyrenoise questions should be discussed during the first day of the session (15 September 1994), with the participation of experts from the tyre industry, who are expected to take part also in the thirtyfifth session of the Meeting of Experts on Brakes and Running Gear (12-14September1994). 6.PPThe expert from Japan reviewed the study done in his country, using the coastby method on the ISO/DIS 10 844 test track, with passenger and truck tyres, measurement in the farfield, and studying also the influence of ambient conditions (informal document No. 4). The Meeting of Experts noted also the papers related to tyreroad noise and presented by the expert from OICA (informal documents Nos. 6 and 7). 7.PPDiscussion was resumed on the specifications of the noise test surface (ISO/DIS 10 844) containing technological prescriptions for laying of the(|,|,) asphalt concrete surface. Recalling the previous consideration of the matter (TRANS/SC.1/WP.29/GRB/18, para. 11), several delegations supported the opinion of the expert from the Czech Republic that to ensure uniform and comparable measurements it should be sufficient to specify the acoustic characteristics of the test track in the Regulations, and the ISO/DIS 10 844 surface should be given merely as an example. It was agreed, however, that such an approach would have to be agreed both in the European Union Directives and in the ECE Regulations. AMENDMENTS TO NOISE REGULATIONS (a)PPRegulation No. 9 (Noise of threewheeled vehicles) Documentation: TRANS/SC1/WP29/GRB/R.119. 8.PPThe expert from Spain recalled that the abovementioned proposal for draft amendments to the Regulation had been prepared on the basis of aproposal for a Directive which, however, had further been developed. He said that the noise limit had been lowered from 82 dB(A) to 80 dB(A) and that also the application schedule had been modified, and agreed to prepare the additional amendments to the Regulation in this respect. 9.PPThe experts from IMMA and Italy suggested that for the sake of efficiency and harmonization the modifications for amending Regulation No. 9 should only be prepared and considered by the Meeting of Experts after the proposal for a Directive (COM(93) 449 final COD 470) was adopted in the European Union. 10.PPThough supporting the philosophy of harmonization, the expert from the United States urged the Meeting of Experts to explore the environmental needs of the ECE countries and to use fully its expert potential. In this respect it was also recalled that the 80 dB(A) noise limit had been proposed already by the expert from the former Czechoslovakia during the seventeenth session of the Meeting of Experts and supported by several countries during consideration of the matter at the eighteenth session (TRANS/SC1/WP29/GRB/16, para. 4). 11.PPThe expert from Hungary suggested, that to contribute more to the technical work, the Meeting of Experts on Noise be represented in the ERGANOISE 3 group, also by a member from a nonEuropean Union country. The Chairman of the Meeting of Experts noted the proposal, recalling the current political development in the European Union, where the accession by some countries of the European Free Trade Association (EFTA) is being considered, and agreed to inform the European Commission on this matter. The merit of the suggestion by the expert from Hungary was evaluated by the expert from the United States, who said that in his country the possibilities to accede to the 1958 Agreement were being considered, and in such a case the proper representation of his country in the technical discussions would also be required. '|,)) (b)PPRegulation No.59 (Replacement silencing systems) Documentation: TRANS/SC1/WP29/GRB/R.105; informal document No. 2 of annex 1 to this report. 12.PPThe Meeting of Experts noted the information by the secretariat that information had been received in writing from CLEPA, stating that further test work was being carried out to support the proposal that should be finalized within six months, which would afterwards be transmitted to the Meeting of Experts for consideration. 13.PPThe expert from the Czech Republic drew the attention of the Meeting of Experts to the difference in the requirements of Regulation No. 59, where a replacement exhaust system back pressure might exceed the original one by 25per cent (paragraph 6.3.3.), while in Regulation No. 85 only 1 kPA tolerance in the back pressure is allowed for an equivalent exhaust system (annex 4, Table 1, footnote 1b) for measuring the engine net power, and requested the guidance of the Meeting of Experts on Pollution and Energy in this matter. 14.PPRecalling that an alternative test method for Regulation No. 59 was being considered by the experts from CLEPA (TRANS/SC.1/WP.29/GRB/18, para.12), the expert from Italy voiced his preference for introducing some tolerances, while preserving the actual test method. 15.PPThe Chairman of the Meeting of Experts noted the proposal for the transitional provisions to the 01 series of amendments to Regulation No. 59 (informal document No. 2) and suggested that it should be taken into account when the final proposal was available. He indicated that, also in this case, the advances in the consideration of the matter in the European Commission were being awaited. (c)PPRegulation No. 63 (Noise of mopeds) Documentation: TRANS/SC1/WP29/GRB/R.121. 16.PPThe expert from Spain informed the Meeting of Experts that the available proposal (TRANS/SC1/WP29/GRB/R.121) was subject to the same development as in the case of Regulation No.9 and agreed to prepare the relevant additional amendments. He recalled that the proposal (COM(93) 449 final COD 470) for aDirective was still to be discussed in the Council of the European Union and that it specified the following moped noise limits applicable as from 1January 1997: XPPXX moped with max. speed  25 km/h :@66 dB(A);" XPPXX moped with max. speed > 25 km/h :@71 db(A);" XPPX threewheeled moped :``4:@76 dB(A)." Responding to the intervention by the expert from the United Kingdom, who recalled that in Regulation No. 63 the speed of 30 km/h was set as a limit, he explained that the speed of 25 km/h was considered for the Directive to take into account also bicycles with an auxiliary engine. (|,))Ԍ(d)PPRegulation No. 92 (Replacement silencing systems for motorcycles) Documentation: TRANS/SC1/WP29/GRB/R.122; TRANS/SC.1/WP.29/GRB/R.126. 17.PPThe Meeting of Experts considered the proposal by IMMA prepared with the aim of giving a clear distinction between the original and replacement silencing systems and, in principle, applicable also to Regulations Nos. 9, 41 and 63. In this respect it was, however, also noted that it was a partial proposal only and that, in case of its acceptance, the text of those Regulations would have to be modified accordingly, to correspond to the modified definitions. An exchange of views was also held on the equipment which should and/or might be encompassed by the term "silencing system". 18.PPReiterating that the situation for the proposal (TRANS/SC1/WP29/GRB/R.122) for amendments to Regulation No. 92 was identical to that for Regulations Nos. 9 and 63, the expert from Spain agreed to prepare the relevant additional amendments. 19.PPThe expert from France drew the attention of the Meeting of Experts to the requirement of Regulation No. 92 that, with the replacement silencing system, the maximum power of the motorcycle should not exceed the original one by more than 5 per cent and proposed that an acceptable loss of power should also be specified. He accepted the invitation by the Meeting of Experts to prepare a proposal in this respect. 20.PPThe expert from the Czech Republic requested that, in considering the amendments to Regulation No. 92, due regard should also be paid to the requirements of Regulation No. 40, where a possibility might exist of influencing the emissions of pollutants by the engine when installing a replacement silencing system modifying the engine power curve. He suggested that also in this case (see para. 13 above) the advice of the Meeting of Experts on Pollution and Energy would be desirable. EXCHANGE OF INFORMATION ON NATIONAL AND INTERNATIONAL REQUIREMENTS ON NOISE LEVELS 21.PPThe expert from Belgium, recalling the information he had given during the nineteenth session, reiterated that no apparent need existed for inservice noise measurement of passenger cars, but that such measurements were needed for mopeds and motorcycles and that these were being carried out on a transportable drum brake at the maximum engine speed. Problems were also encountered with noise nuisance by trucks, but no inservice checks were being carried out. 22.PPThe expert from France recalled the problems with availability of r.p.m.meters adaptable to all different motorcycle engine types and makes and suitable for inservice measurements by police authorities. 23.PPThe expert from the United States said that the electronic engine control equipment had opened wide possibilities for the checking of vehicles in operation. He also reported an experience where an electronic equipment was found to limit the engine r.p.m. in the operation conforming to the(|,)) requirements of a noise test during acceleration, which, however, also limited the noise emitted during the operation in the city, where the driving conditions tended to be similar. The expert from OICA compared the electronic engine management with the mechanical means (different multiplication in the mechanical gearbox/axle), saying that this should be accepted as a control choice to the manufacturer. The Chairman of the Meeting of Experts suggested that the text of the noise Regulations should be examined with respect to such new technologies. Referring to the same matter, the expert from IMMA expressed his opinion that manufacturers would not intentionally use electronic engine control as defeat devices and that there was no apparent need to modify the text of noise Regulations in this respect. 24.PPThe expert from Hungary referred to quiet, "L"marked vehicles according to requirements in Austria and in Germany, and reported that the same requirements were also being applied in his country and raised the question of incorporation of such requirements into Regulation No. 51 and/or in the Directive. The expert from Germany pointed out the difference in noise measurement which, according to national requirements on "L" vehicles, were carried on the drained asphalt surface, reducing noise by as much as 2 dB(A), compared with the ISO/DIS 10 844 test track. OTHER BUSINESS (a)PPDefinition of testing provisions in noise Regulations Documentation: TRANS/SC.1/WP.29/GRB/R.125. 25.PPThe expert from OICA supported the proposal in principle as a means for harmonization of testing provisions in Regulations Nos. 9, 41, 51, 59, 63 and92, with the exception of item B where, with respect to the current situation and, for the sake of harmonization with Directive 92/907/EEC, the ISO/DIS 10 844 test surface should be specified instead of prescribing the sound properties only. 26.PPThe expert from France suggested that the use of a class I sonometer, properly calibrated, should be required, similar to the proposal given in informal document No. 5 (sees paras. 3 and 4 above). 27.PPThe expert from Italy reported that a number of differences were found when comparing document TRANS/SC.1/WP.29/GRB/R.125 with the requirements of Directive 92/97/EEC. The expert from the Czech Republic agreed to revise the proposal for consideration at the next session, taking into account the comments voiced and the official text of the Directive. (b)PPTest track specifications in noise Regulations 28.PPRecalling the discussion of this matter during the twentieth session (TRANS/SC.1/WP.29/GRB/18, para. 11), as well as the consideration of the matter during the current session (see para. 7 above), the Meeting of Experts agreed that no further discussion was needed. (|,))Ԍ(c)PPProhibition of asbestos in silencing systems 29.PPThe Meeting of Experts noted that such a requirement had only been incorporated into Regulation No. 41, 02 series of amendments and that, for eventual amendments to other noise Regulations, a suitable proposal would need to be prepared. (d)PPApplication of ECE Regulations to electric vehicles Documentation: Proposal by France (informal document No. 5 to the onehundredandfirst session of the Working Party on the Construction of Vehicles, see annex 1 to this report); informal document No.8 of annex 1 to this report. 30.PPThe Meeting of Experts agreed with the proposal by France. It was, however, proposed that Regulation No. 9 could also be added as applicable without modifications, because in case of city electric vehicles the threewheeled vehicles might be accepted as a design alternative. 31.PPThe Meeting of Experts noted the proposal by the expert from France (informal document No. 8) for incorporating the provisions with respect to electric vehicles into Regulation No. 51. Responding to the question by the expert from OICA the expert from France said that this proposal would also apply to electric vehicles equipped with a gearbox. The Meeting of Experts agreed to consider the proposal at its next session, taking into account the relevant decisions of the Working Party at its onehundredandsecond session. The secretariat was requested to distribute informal document No. 8 with an official symbol. 32.PPThe expert from OICA informed the Meeting of Experts about the activities of the standardization bodies in the field of electric vehicles, and referring particularly to the European Committee for Standardization (CEN), suggested that due account of the results of their work should be taken in preparing the amendments to ECE Regulations. 33.PPThe experts from the United Kingdom and from Italy made their reservations with respect to application of the ECE Regulations to electric vehicles, requesting time to study the proposal and to consult the experts in their home countries. (e)PPRegulation No. 51 (Noise of M and N categories of Vehicles) Documentation: Informal documents Nos. 3 and 9 of annex 1 to this report. 34.PPThe expert from the Czech Republic informed the Meeting of Experts that informal document No. 3 had been prepared in order to introduce into the Conformity of Production (COP) procedures in Regulation No. 51 also the test for checking compressed air system noise. Referring to this proposal, the expert from OICA reported that the COP procedures had been checked in Directive 92/97/EEC and it had been found that they covered all kinds of noise measurements, in the responsibility by the manufacturer's quality control. (|,)) Hesuggested that the COP procedures in Regulation No. 51 should be aligned with those in the Directive, to provide also for compressed air noise. An exchange of views was held on the possibilities of amending the test procedure. The Meeting of Experts agreed to consider the matter at its next session and requested the secretariat to distribute informal document No. 3 with an official symbol. PP 35.PPThe expert from the United Kingdom introduced informal document No. 9, containing the testing provision which had been omitted in the draft 02series of amendments to Regulation No. 51 (TRANS/SC.1/WP.29/R.635), but which exists in Directive 92/97/EEC and is indispensable for carrying out the acceleration test at certain conditions. The Meeting of Experts considered the document and adopted it, its text to be inserted into annex 3, paragraph3.1.2.3.2.2. of the Regulation (see annex 2 to this report). Taking into account that the 02 series of amendments would be on the agenda of the Working Party at its onehundredandsecond session (811 March 1994), the Meeting of Experts requested the secretariat to transmit the document to the Working Party for consideration at that session. (f)PPAcknowledgement to Mr. B. Buna 36.PPBeing informed by Mr. B. Buna of his leaving the Hungarian Institute for Transport Sciences for a new company which he has created, the Meeting of Experts acknowledged Mr. Buna's contribution to its work and wished him every success in his future enterprise as well as in his private life. |,)) AGENDA FOR THE NEXT SESSION 37.PPThe Meeting of Experts agreed on the following agenda for its twenty-second session (Geneva, 15 September (9.30 a.m.) and 16 September (to5.30 p.m.) 1994): PP1. 1/Tyreroad noise measurement PP2.Amendments to noise regulations:" XPPX2.1. Regulation No. 9 (Noise of threewheeled vehicles)" XPPX2.2. Regulation No. 51 (Noise of M and N category vehicles)" XPPX2.3. Regulation No. 59 (Replacement silencing systems)" XPPX2.4.X Regulation No. 63 (Noise of mopeds)" PP2.5. Regulation No. 92 (Replacement exhaust silencing systems for motorcycles)" XPPX2.6.X Definition of testing provisions in noise regulations" PP3.Application of ECE Regulations to electric vehicles XPPXAmendments to Regulation No. 51" XPP4.XExchange of information on national and international requirements on noise levels 2/" XPP5.Other business"P __________  1/XPPThis item will be discussed on 15 September 1994, as the first item."P XPPDuring the consideration of this item the participation of the experts from the tyre industry would be desirable (safety considerations)."P XPPThe twentysecond session of the Meeting of Experts on Noise is preceded by the thirtyfifth session of the Meeting of Experts on Brakes and Running Gear (1214 September 1994), during which any agenda items related to tyres were suggested to be discussed on Wednesday, 14September, facilitating thus the experts from the tyre industry their participation at both sessions. "P 2/XPPDelegations are invited to submit brief statements on the latest status in national requirements (if applicable) and, if necessary, to supplement this information orally."P ma,__________# |,)) ISVmPP X X "(.``4:@hhFTRANS/WP.29/GRB/19 PP X X "(.``4:@hhFpage  PP X X "(.``4:@hhFAnnex 1 I7 TVmTRANS/WP.29/GRB/19 page  Annex 17a-Annex 1 a LIST OF INFORMAL DOCUMENTS DISTRIBUTED WITHOUT A SYMBOL DURING THE SESSION No. Transmitted Agenda Language Title    by   item      X` hp x (#%'0*,.8135@8:@ 1.Unitedd d 1.LL'E.An examination of the relationship between Kingdomd d LL'.tyre noise and safety performance (P.M.Nelson, G.J.Harris and B.J.Robinson, TRL Project Report PR/ENV/047/93S030J/VB" 2.Germanyd d 2.2.LL'E.Proposal for draft transitional provisions to the 01 series of amendments to Regulation No. 59" 3.Czechd d 4.5.LL'E.Proposal for draft amendments to Republicd d LL'.Regulation No. 51" 4.Japand d 1.LL'E.Experimental study of the temperature effects on tyre/road noise in Japan" 5.Franced d 1.T LL'E.Proposal Permissible sound level of tyres related to tyre/road noise" 6.OICAd d 1.LL'E.TirePavement Interaction Noise Measurement Under Vehicle Operating Conditions of Cruise and Acceleration (Paul R. Donavan, GM Noise and Vibration Center; SAE Paper 931276)" 7.OICAd d 1.LL'E.Tire Noise Intensity Statistical Analysis (J.Stuart Bolton, Ray W.Herrick Laboratories, School of Mech.Engineering, Purdue Univ., West Lafayette, IN 47907" 8.Franced d 4.4.LL'E/F.Introduction of prescriptions related to electric powered vehicles into ECE Regulation No. 51" 9.Unitedd d 4.5.LL'E.ECE Regulation No. 51 (Noise of M and N Kingdomd d LL'.category vehicles)" Franced d 4.4.LL'E/F.French Proposal Relating to the Technical Regulation Applicable to the Electric Motor Vehicles (Informal document No. 5 as distributed during the onehundredandfirst session of the Working Party)" ma,__________ ( |,)) SV\ed d LL'.:@hhFTRANS/WP.29/GRB/19 d d LL'.:@hhFpage  d d LL'.:@hhFAnnex 2 7TV\eTRANS/WP.29/GRB/19 page  Annex 27a.Annex 2ă aDRAFT AMENDMENTS TO THE 02 SERIES OF AMENDMENTS TO REGULATION No. 51 a!(document TRANS/SC.1/WP.29/R.635) a!ADOPTED BY THE MEETING OF EXPERTS Annex 3, paragraph 3.1.2.3.2.2., add the following text at the end: "...." If during the test in second gear, the engine speed exceeds the engine speed, S, at which the engine develops its rated maximum power, the test must be repeated with an approach speed and/or approach engine speed reduced by steps of 5 % S, until the engine speed attained no longer exceeds S."" ma,__________