|
Date: 2002- Document: ISO/DIS 13590 添付資料25Template for comments and secretariat observations
| 1 |
2 |
(3) |
4 |
5 |
(6) |
(7) |
| MB1 |
Clause No. / Subclause No./ Annex/ Figure /Table
(e.g. 3.1, Table 2) |
Paragraph / List item / Note
(e.g. Note 2) |
Type of comment2 |
Comment (justification for change) by the MB |
Proposed change by the MB |
Secretariat observations
on each comment submitted |
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| JP |
8.2 |
|
te |
A height for drop test being used for PWC in Japan is “2.5m”,
which has been well-functioning so far in Japan and this value “2.5m” can be also
obtained as a height for PWC in drop testing when applying the method in accordance
with the Annex C of ISO/DIS 12215-5 based on its speed/length ratio.
It seems that there is no reason for reducing the value of a height for drop test
while there can be seen an inclination that the speed of PWC are recently increasing
in general. |
A height of “2m” for drop test stipulated in the section 8.2
shall be changed to “2.5m”. |
|
| JP |
Figure 2 |
NOTE |
ed |
Regarding the instruction of the steering impact tests (figure
2), we made a comparison table and added our proposal as attached. (Please refers
attached Excel file.)
We believe that we would be better to harmonize with other related standards as
much as possible.
So we would like to propose to keep using "2285mm +/-150"for the dimension
"d.
We had missed using "SI units to this clause.
So we would like to propose to use the figures in ISO10592:1994, except dimension
"d.
I could not image why such figure (stricter allowance) have been adopted. |
|
|
|
1 |
|
MB = Member body (enter the ISO 3166 two-letter country code, e.g. CN for China) ** = ISO/CS editing unit |
2 |
|
Type of comment: ge = general te = technical ed = editorial |
NB |
|
Columns 1, 2, 4, 5 are compulsory. |
2001/27/July
Comparison of Impact test's instruction
| （拡大画面：51KB） |
 |
|
