GTR-04-18
SAE HADD J826 3D CAD
H-Point Manikin
GTR-7 Update
Sept. 17, 2010
SAE HADD Committee
Dr. Lawrence Smythe - Chair
Outline of Presentation
• Objectives for Creating SAE 3D CAD Oscar
• Answers to Questions From GTR-7 Members
• Relevant SAE J826 Manikin History
• Control Points for SAE J826 3D CAD Model
• Decisions made to Model SAE J826 3D CAD
• Comparison to Scans & VDA model
• Results
• Recommendations
Objectives for Creating SAE 3D CAD HMP-I Model
SAE HADD subcommittee used Hyundai-created solid model to make
surface of HPM-I shell from two, new, Technosports-calibrated
manikins-- one scanned by Lear and the other by Toyota)
Create shell only with torso line, thigh line and weight hanger line
(Hardware is Next Project)
Make manikin shell symmetrical
Primary Objectives:
1. Create Official SAE 3D CAD J826 HPM-I Model
2. Tighten Specifications to Improve the Accuracy and
Reliability of the J826 HPM-I Physical and CAD Measurements
Answers to Questions From GTR-7 Members
Q: SAE HADD Evaluation of VDA Proposal: SAE J826 HPM-I CAD Model
(When Completed) is (at this time) the only recognized model
Q: SAE HADD Plans (if any) to evaluate the effects of VDA proposal
for ATD positioning: HADD will request VDA in a letter (intended due
date to send is 9/24/10) to request VDA share their HRMD, Manikin
and Dilemma Models for HADD to Evaluate
Q: Any Comment on Legal Rights to Manikin Ownership: SAE
International is the only agency that can comment on legal ownership
rights, licensing issues, integration into regulation or can recommend,
endorse, or approve to adopt the VDA proposed manikin, HRMD, and
Dilemma calibration fixture
Relevant SAE J826 Manikin History
Developed at GM late 1950’s: became SAE test procedure 1962
Manufacturer changed several times until 1989. Quality was poor
from some manikins and some parts were not made according to
the drawing
From 1989 Technosports became sole and official manufacturer
of J826. They reverse-engineered the shell molds from skins
given to them by SAE through GM.
GM also gave them assembly fixtures.
SAE told Technosports to prioritize fixtures over assembly dwg's
Control Points for SAE J826 3D CAD Model
8 10
9
4 5
2 3
1
6
Used control points in fixture as control points for model + others
Decisions made to Model SAE J826 3D CAD
A) For the cushion pan symmetry, the left side was
reflected (with some tweaking to match scans)
B) For the Back pan, the right side was reflected (again
with tweaking to match scans)
C) We enforced some flat areas to the cushion and the
back because we felt it improved the design while still
matching the scan.
00x VDA & SAE are about 2mm Different
Comparison:
VDA & SAE J826
CAD Bottom Shell
Models
00z VDA & SAE are about 2mm Different
Good Match between
VDA & SAE Bottom
Shell at 00x & 00z
VDA Bottom Shell Must be Rotated up 0.73 degrees
to Equal SAE J826 Model
Result: Center Section of VDA is Higher than SAE
Conclusion: SAE & VDA Thigh Angles Measures will be Different
VDA
SAE 000_Y
SECT 300Z VDA is 4.4mm Wider than SAE
Comparison:
VDA & SAE J826 CAD
Back Shell
Z Section Models
SECT 500 Z VDA is 8.5mm Wider than SAE
Conclusion: SAE &
VDA Backs are similar
up to 300Z Then VDA
becomes increasingly
Wider than SAE
Comparison:
SECT_SECT_0_X VDA & SAE J826 CAD
Back Shell
VDA
SAE X Section Models
VDA Back is 7.2mm Oblique
X_Z Rear than SAE
VDA Back is
3.6mm Higher
than SAE
Results
New SAE Model matches scans within 1mm in all key area
and meets SAE J826 dimensional constraints
VDA cushion orientation is different by ~0.73deg (lower at
front); when aligned with SAE model
VDA cushion model is close to SAE model in shape
VDA Back model is considerably different in height and lateral
back contour than the SAE model and scans.
NOTE: Comparison of SAE and VDA CAD Models is Ongoing so
Measurement Differences between Models is Preliminary and May Change
SAE J826 Recommendations
Improvements could be made to Technosports HPM-I fixtures to
improve accuracy and ease of use
1) Front bar on cushion fixture should be moved rearward for
better control of cushion angle
2) Add a second bar to orient back angle
3) New molds could be considered so they more accurately
reflect J826 CAD
Future Action—Short Term
HADD Member companies are reviewing the J826 3D CAD
model and will submit comments by 10/8/10 for discussion
at the 8/20/10 HADD meeting
Discuss GTR-7 feedback at HADD 10/20/10 meeting
Share SAE HPM-I model with VDA and possibly discuss at
10/20/10 meeting
Proposed (Near Future) J826 HPM-I Activities
Surface inside of Cushion and Back Shells, add hardware
and add reference lines for HRMD attachments
Obtain HRMD CAD data from VDA and Discuss calibration
values of SAE J826 HPM-I CAD Model
Compare HPM-I CAD Model with 2d template and finalize
the CAD 2d template by 3/11
Edit J826 recommended practice to add calibration values
of HPM-I and CAD Model
Proposed Future J826 HPM-I & HPM-II Activities
To Reduce Measurement Variability, HADD intends to
Propose a Common J826 HPM-I and HPM-II, HRMD Backset
Measurement Method (estimated) by 3/11
Thank You
Comments may be sent to
Lawrence Smythe EdD
Principal Engineer: Human Engineering Department
Nissan Technical Center, NA, Inc.
39001 Sunrise Drive
Farmington Hills, MI 48331-
48331-3487
248-
248-488-
488-8591 Tel
248-
248-488-
488-3905 Fax
smythel@ntcna.nissan-
smythel@ntcna.nissan-usa.com
