HEAVY VEHICLES TEST AND
ASSESSMENT PROTOCOL
Version 1.2

Euro NCAP © OCTOBER 2012
EUROPEAN NEW CAR ASSESSMENT PROGRAMME

Copyright © 2012 Euro NCAP - This work is the intellectual property of Euro NCAP. Permission is granted forthis material to be shared for non-commercial, educational purposes, provided that this copyright statement
appears on the reproduced materials and notice is given that the copying is by permission of Euro NCAP. To
disseminate otherwise or to republish requires written permission from Euro NCAP.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1. INTRODUCTION................................................................................................................. 4
2. PRINCIPLES....................................................................................................................... 5
3. APPLICATION AND AMENDMENT OF PROTOCOLS ...................................................... 5
3.1. Vehicle Specification, Selection, Testing & Retesting (CSSTR) Protocol .................................. 5
3.1.1. Base Safety Equipment............................................................................................................... 5
3.1.2. Test Variant ................................................................................................................................. 6
3.2. Euro NCAP Frontal Impact Testing Protocol (version 5.2) .......................................................... 6
3.2.1. Child Dummy Positioning ............................................................................................................ 6
3.2.2. Test Speed .................................................................................................................................. 6
3.3. Euro NCAP Side Impact Testing Protocol (version 5.2) ............................................................... 7
3.3.1. Child Dummy Positioning ............................................................................................................ 7
3.4. Euro NCAP Whiplash Test Protocol (version 3.1)......................................................................... 7
3.4.1. Sled Testing ................................................................................................................................ 7
3.4.2. Head Restraint Geometry ........................................................................................................... 7
3.5. Pedestrian Test Protocol (version 5.3.1)........................................................................................ 7
3.5.1. Definitions.................................................................................................................................... 7
3.5.2. Determination of Impact Points ................................................................................................... 8
3.5.3. Headform Testing........................................................................................................................ 8

4. SCORING AND OVERALL RATING .................................................................................. 94.1. Euro NCAP Assessment Protocol – AOP (version 5.4) ................................................................ 9
4.1.1. Whiplash Scoring ........................................................................................................................ 94.2. Euro NCAP Assessment Protocol – COP (version 5.3) ................................................................ 94.3. Euro NCAP Assessment Protocol – PP (version 5.1) ................................................................... 9
4.3.1. Pedestrian Protection Scoring..................................................................................................... 94.4. Euro NCAP Assessment Protocol – SA (version 5.5) ................................................................... 94.5. Euro NCAP Assessment Protocol – Overall Rating (version 5.1) ............................................. 10

APPENDIX I.......................................................................................................................... 11
APPENDIX II......................................................................................................................... 12© 2009-2012 European New Car Assessment Programme

Heavy Vehicles Test and Assessment
Protocol • Version 1.2

HEAVY VEHICLES TEST AND ASSESSMENT PROTOCOL
1. INTRODUCTION
Euro NCAP first issued protocols for frontal and side impacts and for pedestrian testing in
1996. The protocols were based on the work of the EEVC which, in the case of the frontal
and side impacts, formed the basis of new legislative requirements. As no side impact
requirement had previously existed in legislation, Euro NCAP’s protocols were unchanged
from the directive. In frontal impact, where a full-width test had previously been in force, thetest speed for the offset deformable barrier test was increased from 56km/h to 64km/h tocover a greater proportion of real life accidents and to ensure some discrimination in the
results.
In legislation, the frontal impact test became a requirement for M1 passenger cars only, while
the side impact became mandatory for M1 and N1 (light commercial) vehicles. Euro NCAP
also tested only M1 passenger cars for many years, and is widely accredited with stimulatinga significant increase in the safety of cars’ occupants in the last ten years or so. However, theincreased structural stiffness needed to provide improved occupant protection also led to theincreased ‘aggressivity’ of cars’ front ends towards other vehicles. The problem becomesacute for heavy vehicles as Euro NCAP’s test against an immovable concrete block requires
them to absorb their own kinetic energy.
Against this background, there was some concern that the testing of heavy vehicles, some ofwhich were derived from commercial variants, might encourage increasingly stiff front end
structures in vehicles which already behaved aggressively towards others. Also, EuroNCAP’s test protocols, developed with ‘normal’ passenger cars in mind, might not generatemeaningful data when applied to vehicles developed from other design concepts. Therefore, asubgroup was initiated in 2009 to investigate how Euro NCAP’s existing protocols might beadapted to ensure that they provided sensible results when applied to heavy vehicles and at
the same time mitigated any increases in aggressivity towards other cars.
This protocol details the changes from the standard Euro NCAP 2012 protocols which should
be applied when testing heavy vehicles and the scope of application: the vehicles which areconsidered by Euro NCAP to require use of the modified protocols. It is Euro NCAP’s intention
that the protocol should apply only to heavy M1 vehicles derived from commercial variants.
The protocol attempts to define such vehicles. However, it is recognised that it may not be
possible to develop a rigid, objective definition and Euro NCAP may apply the definition
judiciously.
The protocol is an interim step: it is hoped that the issue of compatibility will be addressed in
more detail at a later date and that a more complete suite of tests can be developed toencourage partner protection as well as occupant safety. Moreover, no attempt has been
made by the group to extend Euro NCAP’s protocols to purely commercial vehicles, for whichmore comprehensive changes would need to be made to cover typical payloads and how they
are secured.

OCTOBER 2012 / All rights reserved.

4

Heavy Vehicles Test and Assessment
Protocol • Version 1.2© 2009-2012 European New Car Assessment Programme

2. PRINCIPLES
A vehicle type will fall within the scope of this protocol if there exists within the model range atleast one variant meeting all of the following criteria:

M1 categoryMaximum Mass (Gross Vehicle Weight) > 2500kg and <3500kg



8 or 9 seats, including the driver’s seat.

The application of this definition and the way in which the test variant is identified is discussed
in more detail in paragraph 3.1.
The above scope would normally include the group of people carriers or family vans. It is
anticipated that application of the protocol may in time be extended to cover other heavy
vehicles.

3. APPLICATION AND AMENDMENT OF PROTOCOLSFor testing vehicles which fall within the scope of this protocol, the amendments andinterpretations of the following paragraphs shall be applied. In cases where no specificreference to a test protocol is given, testing remains unchanged and the original protocols of2012 should be used (see Appendix I).
Note: The use of the alternative font indicates text taken from the original protocol
concerned. Paragraph references contained in such text refer to the numbering system ofthat protocol.

3.1. Vehicle Specification, Selection, Testing & Retesting (CSSTR) Protocol
3.1.1. Base Safety Equipment
3.1.1.1. When identifying the Basic Level Safety specification, the fitment of equipment to thefollowing variants in the model range is considered:
Table 1 Variants
Item of Safety Equipment

Variants to be included in sales

Electronic Stability Control (ESC)
Seatbelt Reminder (driver andpassenger)
Speed Limitation Device

M1 (up to 3500kg) and N1
excluding chassis cab variantsof both categories

Frontal airbags
All other safety equipment

M1 onlyexcluding chassis cab variants, <3500kg

3.1.1.2. The minimum fitment required to qualify as ‘basic level safety’ equipment will be as
follows for vehicles tested under this protocol:

OCTOBER 2012 / All rights reserved.

5

Heavy Vehicles Test and Assessment
Protocol • Version 1.2© 2009-2012 European New Car Assessment Programme

Table 2 Minimum Fitment (in calendar year in which the result is released).
Year

Variants to be included in sales

2012

Fitted as standard in 50% of sales and at least optional on
all variants defined in 3.1.1

2013

Fitted as standard in 60% of sales and at least optional on
all variants defined in 3.1.1

2014

Fitted as standard in 80% of sales and at least optional on
all variants defined in 3.1.1

2015

Fitted as standard in 100% of sales and at least optionalon all variants defined in 3.1.1

3.1.2. Test Variant
3.1.2.1. The manufacturer shall identify the M1 variant (excluding chassis cabs) which sells
better than any other single M1 variant (excluding chassis cabs). The test vehicle
shall be the variant which is nearest to the best seller having the following
characteristics:
Is equipped only with the base safety equipment identified in 3.1.1



Has two distinct front seats (no bench seats)

3.1.2.2. For further information on which parameters can be changed if the test variant isdifferent from the best-selling variant, see the VSSTR protocol.

3.2. Euro NCAP Frontal Impact Testing Protocol (version 5.2)
3.2.1. Child Dummy Positioning
3.2.1.1. The original text in the protocol should be amended to read as follows:
3.1.2 A TNO/Ogle P1½ child dummy, in a suitable Child Restraint
System (CRS) (see Section 7.6), shall be used in the second row
passenger side seating position.
3.1.3 A TNO P3 child dummy, in a suitable CRS (see Section 7.6),
shall be used in the second row outboard driver side seating
position.
3.2.1.2. And the first sentence of the paragraph:
7.6 Two CRS’s are to be fitted in the second row seat, one
suitable for a 3 year old child, the other for an 18month oldinfant.

3.2.2. Test Speed
3.2.2.1. The original text in the protocol should be amended to read as follows:
9.2.2 This speed should be 56km/h (35mph) ± 1km/h. Record theactual test speed in the test details.
TARGET SPEED = 56km/h ± 1km/h
OCTOBER 2012 / All rights reserved.

6

© 2009-2012 European New Car Assessment Programme

Heavy Vehicles Test and Assessment
Protocol • Version 1.2

3.3. Euro NCAP Side Impact Testing Protocol (version 5.2)
3.3.1. Child Dummy Positioning
3.3.1.1. The original text in the protocol should be amended to read as follows:
2.1.2 A TNO/Ogle P1½ child dummy, in a suitable Child Restraint
System (CRS) (see Section 6.4), shall be used in the second row
driver side seating position.
2.1.3 A TNO P3 child dummy, in a suitable CRS (see Section 6.4),
shall be used in the second row passenger side seating position.
3.3.1.2. And the first sentence is amended as follows:
6.4 Two CRS’s are to be fitted in the second row seat, one
suitable for a 3 year old child, the other for an 18 month oldinfant.

3.4. Euro NCAP Whiplash Test Protocol (version 3.1)
3.4.1. Sled Testing
3.4.1.1. No dynamic tests are performed and references to dynamic tests shall not apply.

3.4.2. Head Restraint Geometry
3.4.2.1. The backset and height of the head restraint shall be determined according to theprocedures detailed in (5.4) and (5.5) of the Euro NCAP Whiplash Test Protocol,
Version 3.1. However a torso angle of 20º should be used instead of 25º. If theseatback angle is not adjustable, the fixed design angle should be used.
3.4.2.2. The following paragraph is amended:
5.4.8 Some indexed seatback adjustments may have more than 2°
between adjustments with none giving a torso angle between
20°±1°. In such cases, adjust the seatback to the most reclined
position that supports a torso angle less than 19°.
3.4.2.3. Backset and height should be measured in two head restraint positions (or one if noadjustment is possible): test position and ‘down and back’. See section (6) of thewhiplash protocol for definitions of these terms.
3.4.2.4. Head restraints for the rear seats may also qualify for assessment if they are fitted as
standard on all rear seating positions in at least the ‘base safety specification’percentage of sales (see section 3.1). In this case, the test laboratory shall measure
the geometry of the worst case seat according to section 3.4.2.

3.5. Pedestrian Test Protocol (version 5.3.1)
3.5.1. Definitions
3.5.1.1. The bonnet angle is defined as the angle to the ground reference level, of a straightedge connecting the intersection point of the Bonnet Leading Edge Reference Lineand the medial longitudinal vertical plane and the intersection point of the bonnet

OCTOBER 2012 / All rights reserved.

7

© 2009-2012 European New Car Assessment Programme

Heavy Vehicles Test and Assessment
Protocol • Version 1.2

panel rear edge (if the vehicle has no bonnet panel, the front panel rear edge) and the
medial longitudinal vertical plane. The angle designated by the manufacturer may bedeemed as the bonnet angle if it deviates within ±2° from the actual measurement.

3.5.2. Determination of Impact Points
3.5.2.1. The following paragraphs are amended:
4.3.1 A test is not required if the calculated impact energy
would be 200 J or less, nor if the height of the Bonnet Leading
Edge Reference Line as defined in Section 3.4 is, at all points,
greater or equal to 835 mm vertically above the ground at thevehicle’s normal ride attitude.
4.4.3.3 Where test locations are on the movable/hinged bonnet
top or grille/bumper area between 1500 mm and 1700 mm WAD thechild/small adult impactor shall be used. Where test locations
are on the windscreen/windscreen base area between 1500 mm and1700 mm WAD the adult impactor shall be used. […]4.4.3.6 […] Areas forward the bonnet (grille and bumper area):
underlying stiff structures such as bumper beam, frame rail,
towing eye, crumple cans, cooling components, front spoiler
mounted lights, radiator/intercooler edges or fixation mounts,
licence plate mounts

3.5.3. Headform Testing
3.5.3.1. The following paragraphs are amended as follows:
10.3.4 Fit the required headform to the propulsion system. A
child/small adult headform impactor shall be used for tests tothe bonnet top, grille and bumper area, A-pillars, windscreen,roof (labelled C in Section 3.9), with the test locations lying
between boundaries described by wrap around distances of 1000 mm
and 1500 mm. An adult headform impactor shall be used for tests
to the bonnet top, A-pillars, windscreen, roof, grille andbumper area (where applicable) (labelled A in Section 2.9), withthe test locations lying between boundaries described by wrap
around distances of 1700 mm and 2100 mm. Where test locations
lie between 1500 mm and 1700 mm the structure being tested will
determine the headform to be used, see Section 4.4.3.3.
10.3.8 The direction of impact shall be in the fore and aftvertical plane of the section of the vehicle to be tested. The
tolerance for this direction is ±2°. The direction of impact ofheadform tests shall be downward and rearward, as if the vehicle
were on the ground. The angle of impact for tests rearward theBonnet Leading Edge Reference Line shall always be 50° to theground reference level. For tests forward the Bonnet Leading
Edge Reference Line the impact angle shall always be 20° to theground reference level. The impact angles apply likewise forboth the child/small adult as well as the adult headform
impactor […]OCTOBER 2012 / All rights reserved.

8

© 2009-2012 European New Car Assessment Programme

Heavy Vehicles Test and Assessment
Protocol • Version 1.2

4. SCORING AND OVERALL RATINGThe scores for the four areas of overall assessment – adult occupant, child occupant,pedestrian and safety assist – shall be incorporated into the overall rating scheme as definedin ‘Euro-NCAP Assessment Protocol Overall Rating’.

4.1. Euro NCAP Assessment Protocol – AOP (version 5.4)
The scoring for the Frontal Impact Test, Side Barrier Impact Test and Side Pole Impact test
remains unchanged. Amendments have been introduced for the following sections.

4.1.1. Whiplash Scoring
4.1.1.1. A flowchart in Appendix II, Figure 1 illustrates the way in which whiplash tests arescored.
4.1.1.2. A maximum of two points is available for the front seating positions. For each front
seat, a maximum of two points is available: one point when measured in the test
position and one point when measured in the ‘down and back’ position. For each seat
the scores in these two positions are added. The score for the front seats is taken asthat of the seat which scores most poorly. The minimum score possible is zero.
4.1.1.3. A maximum of two points is available for the rear seating positions, where they qualify
for assessment. Each rear seat is measured, by a single HRMD drop, in the test
position and the down/back position. The rear seat which scores most poorly is thenmeasured, using an average of three HRMD drops, in the test position and in the fully
down and back position. A maximum of one point can be scored in each restraint
position. The scores from each position are summed. The minimum score possible iszero.
4.1.1.4. The scores of front and rear seating positions are added.

4.2. Euro NCAP Assessment Protocol – COP (version 5.3)
The scoring for the Child Occupant Protection remains unchanged. The ECE 94-02 sun visor
label, provided colours and size are meeting the regulation, will qualify for two points underparagraph 3.5.1.1.

4.3. Euro NCAP Assessment Protocol – PP (version 5.1)
4.3.1. Pedestrian Protection Scoring
4.3.1.1. For the assessment of pedestrian protection, if no tests have been performed to thebonnet leading edge, the maximum score available is 30, not 36. The percentage
score for this box is calculated by dividing the test score by 30.

4.4. Euro NCAP Assessment Protocol – SA (version 5.5)
As Euro NCAP will assess vehicles with distinct front seats (no bench – see Section 3.1.2.1),
and as the Assessment Protocol – SA (version 5.5) refers to seats which can be removed aspart of ‘normal usage’, the scoring for front seatbelt reminder will be based only the outboard
seating positions. The scoring for Safety Assist remains otherwise unchanged.

OCTOBER 2012 / All rights reserved.

9

Heavy Vehicles Test and Assessment
Protocol • Version 1.2© 2009-2012 European New Car Assessment Programme

4.5. Euro NCAP Assessment Protocol – Overall Rating (version 5.1)
The Overall Score and Balance Thresholds for Heavy Vehicles are shown in Table 3.
Table 3 Thresholds for year 2011, 2012, 2013 and 2014.
2011

Box 1:AOP

Box 2:COP

Box 3:PP

Box 4:SA

Total
Weighted

5 stars

80%

75%

25%

60%

70%

4 stars

65%

60%

15%

40%

55%

3 stars

35%

30%

10%

0%

45%

2 stars

30%

25%

5%

0%

35%

1 star

20%

15%

0%

0%

20%

2012

Box 1:AOP

Box 2:COP

Box 3:PP

Box 4:SA

Total
Weighted

5 stars

80%

75%

40%

60%

75%

4 stars

70%

60%

25%

40%

60%

3 stars

40%

30%

15%

25%

50%

2 stars

30%

25%

10%

0%

35%

1 star

20%

15%

5%

0%

25%

2013

Box 1:AOP

Box 2:COP

Box 3:PP

Box 4:SA

Total
Weighted

5 stars

80%

75%

40%

60%

75%

4 stars

70%

60%

25%

40%

60%

3 stars

40%

30%

15%

25%

50%

2 stars

30%

25%

10%

15%

35%

1 star

20%

15%

5%

0%

25%

2014

Box 1:AOP

Box 2:COP

Box 3:PP

Box 4:SA

Total
Weighted

5 stars

80%

75%

60%

60%

80%

4 stars

70%

60%

50%

40%

70%

3 stars

40%

30%

25%

25%

60%

2 stars

30%

25%

15%

15%

55%

1 star

20%

15%

10%

5%

45%

OCTOBER 2012 / All rights reserved.

10

Heavy Vehicles Test and Assessment
Protocol • Version 1.2© 2009-2012 European New Car Assessment Programme

APPENDIX I
List of Reference Protocols
Protocol Title

VersionEuro NCAP Frontal Impact Testing Protocol

v5.2 with amendments, section 3.2

Euro NCAP Side Impact Testing Protocol

v5.2 with amendments, section 3.3

Euro NCAP Side Pole Impact Testing Protocol

v5.2

Whiplash Testing Protocol

v3.1 with amendments, section 3.4

Pedestrian Test Protocol

v5.3.1 with amendments, section 3.5

Euro NCAP ESC Test Protocol

v1.2

Euro NCAP Assessment Protocol - AOP

v5.4 with amendments, section 4.1

Euro NCAP Assessment Protocol - COP

v5.3

Euro NCAP Assessment Protocol - PP

v5.1 with amendments, section 4.3

Euro NCAP Assessment Protocol - SA

v5.5

Euro NCAP Assessment Protocol – Overall Ratingv5.1 with amendments, section 4.5

OCTOBER 2012 / All rights reserved.

11

Heavy Vehicles Test and Assessment
Protocol • Version 1.2© 2009-2012 European New Car Assessment Programme

APPENDIX II
Figure 1 Flowchart for the Calculation of the Whiplash Score

Heavy Vehicles Whiplash Assessment

Test
position

Down
Back

(1 drop)Test
position

Sum

Sum

Driver Seat
Score

All seats(3 drops)

Score

Down
Back
Score

Score

Test
position

Front pass seatScore

(3 drops)

Score

Driver seat

Rear seats

Front Pass Seat
Score

Down
Back
Score

Front seats

Sum

LowestScoring Seat

Average ofThree Drops
Lowest score

Front Seats
Score

Rear Seats
Score
Sum

Heavy Vehicles Whiplash Score

OCTOBER 2012 / All rights reserved.

12