Sentences with phrase «dummy readings»

Based on dummy readings in the dynamic tests, the 5 series was awarded maximum points for protection of the 3 year dummy in the frontal and side impacts.

In the more severe side pole impact, dummy readings of rib compression indicated a marginal level of chest protection.

Dummy readings indicated good protection for all critical body areas of the passenger and of the knees and femurs of both the driver and passenger.

However, in the more severe side pole impact, dummy readings of rib compression indicated marginal protection of the chest.

Dummy readings indicated good protection of all critical body regions in both the side barrier test and the more severe side pole impact.

Chest protection for the rear passenger was rated as marginal, based on dummy readings of chest compression, but that of other parts of the body was good or adequate.

Dummy readings showed good protection of the knees and femurs of both the driver and passenger.

Dummy readings indicated good protection of the knees and femurs for the driver and passenger.

In the frontal offset test, dummy readings from the 6 year dummy indicated marginal protection of the chest and poor protection of the neck.

Dummy readings indicated adequate chest protection for the driver dummy and marginal chest protection for the rear passenger.

Dummy readings for the rear passenger indicated that the pelvis had slipped under the seatbelt and protection of this body area was rated as poor.

In the frontal offset test, dummy readings indicated good protection for all critical body areas of the 10 year dummy.

Dummy readings showed good protection for the knees and femurs of both the driver and passenger dummies.

Dummy readings of head deceleration indicated weak protection of the head for the rear passenger.

At around the same time during the impact, with insufficient gas in the airbag, the chest contacted the rim of the steering wheel and, combined with dummy readings for chest compression, its protection was rated as weak.

Protection of the 6 year dummy, sat in a high - back booster, was rated as good and adequate for the head and neck respectively but dummy readings of chest deceleration indicated marginal chest protection.

In the side barrier test, dummy readings indicated good protection, apart from the head of the 10 year dummy.

Dummy readings indicated good protection of the knees and femurs for both the driver and passenger dummies.

In the side impact barrier test, dummy readings showed good protection of all critical body areas.

Dummy readings of chest deceleration indicated marginal protection of the 6 year old's chest, with good protection of the head and neck.

Dummy readings for the rear passenger indicated marginal protection for the chest.

In the more severe side pole impact, dummy readings of rib compression indicated a marginal level of protection for the chest but protection of other parts of the body was good.

Chest protection was rated as marginal based on dummy readings of rib compression.

Dummy readings indicated good protection of the knees and femurs for both the driver and passenger.

In the frontal offset test, dummy readings indicated good or adequate protection for all critical body areas of both child dummies, apart from the neck of the 10 year old dummy, protection of which was rated as marginal.

In the frontal offset test, protection of the chest of the 6 year dummy was rated as marginal, based on dummy readings of chest decelerations.

Dummy readings for the head of the rear passenger were good, but it moved too far forward in the test, and protection was rated as marginal.

For the front passenger, dummy readings indicated good protection of all critical body areas.

In the frontal offset test, dummy readings in the 6 year dummy indicated marginal chest protection but, otherwise, protection was good or adequate for both dummies.

Protection of the passenger's chest was rated as marginal, based on dummy readings of compression.

Dummy readings indicated good protection of the knees and femurs of both the driver and passenger but structures in the dashboard were thought to present a risk of injury to occupants of different sizes and to those sat in different positions.

The passenger compartment remained stable in the front impact, while dummy readings showed that all the body's regions received a good level of protection.

In the side barrier test, dummy readings showed good protection of all body areas.

As a result, dummy readings for the head and neck were were high and points were scored only for adequate protection of the chest.

Forward movement of the head of the 3 year dummy, sat in a forward - facing restraint, was not excessive but dummy readings indicated high values of neck tension and marginally high readings for chest deceleration.

The passenger compartment remained stable in all tests, and dummy readings indicated good protection.

In the more severe side pole test, dummy readings of rib compression indicated a marginal level of protection for the chest.

In the front offset test, dummy readings indicate weak protection of the neck of the 10 year dummy and marginal protection of the neck and chest of the 6 year dummy.

Dummy readings indicated that the dummy head had made contact with part of the vehicle interior, suggesting that there was insufficient pressure in the airbag.

Dummy readings indicated good protection of the chest and head but the score was penalised owing to the diagonal part of the seatbelt slipping off the dummy's shoulder in the test.

Dummy readings indicated good...

Dummy readings of chest compression indicated marginal protection for this part of the body but good or adequate protection elsewhere.

Although dummy readings for both legs were good, protection of the knee / femur / pelvis region was penalised.

In the frontal offset test, dummy readings indicated marginal protection of the neck and chest of the 6 year dummy but, otherwise, protection of it and the 10 year dummy was good.

Dummy readings of chest compression indicated a marginal level of protection for this part of the body for both the driver and passenger.

However, dummy readings revealed high values of neck tensile forces in the 10 year dummy and marginal protection of the neck and chest of the six year dummy.

Dummy readings indicated good protection of the knees and femurs of the driver and passenger but structures in the dashboard were thought to present a risk to occupants of different sizes and to those sat in different positions.

Similarly, dummy readings of lateral rib compression were high and protection of chest was rated as poor.

However, in the more severe side pole test, dummy readings indicated marginal protection of the chest and abdomen.

Dummy readings indicated good protection of the knees and femurs of the driver and passenger.