[DRAFT] Road Restraint Standardisation

[Riakou]

Catagory: Regulation
Area of Effect: Safety

The World Assembly,

Recognising the importance of road restraint systems in ensuring the protection of drivers, pedestrians and property,

Concerned by the current lack of regulation for both testing and legal requirements of crash barriers, bridge parapets and all other forms of road restraint systems,

Determined to enact an international standard for safety, efficiency and clarity,

The World Assembly hereby enacts the following;

1. Performance of road restraint systems are required to be categorically rated on four key areas, systems that fall outside the requirements of these categories will be declared unfit and thus illegal for installation:

a. Containment level, defined as the ability to contain the vehicle on the road side of the restraint system after a collision has occurred at a 20 degree angle;

L1: Proven to withstand collision with a 1.5t car at a minimum speed of 80km/h.
L2: Proven to withstand collision with a 1.5t car at a minimum speed of 110km/h.

H1: Proven to withstand collision with a 13t bus at a minimum speed of 70km/h.
H2: Proven to withstand collision with a 30t heavy goods vehicle at a minimum speed of 65km/h.

b. Working width, defined as the distance between the original position of the restraint system and the road after collision has occurred at a 20 degree angle;

W1: Less than 0.6m.
W2: Less than 0.8m.
W3: Less than 1.00m.
W4: Less than 1.3m.

c. Length, restraint systems must exist at a minimum of 15.00m before the intended hazard is encountered and 7.5m after the end of the intended hazard.

d. Height, restraint systems must be at a minimum of 1.00m tall from base to top, this does not include any underground sections of the restraint system.

[Imperium Anglorum]

viewtopic.php?p=1821769#p1821769

[Riakou]

Does this contradict in any way thus making this draft ineligible?
I suppose I’ll need a consensus.

This draft expands specifically on crash barrier regulation, which that proposal doesn’t cover as far as I can tell.

[Falcania]

Would this legislation apply in nations without cars on their roads?

[Imperium Anglorum]

I suppose the main question is how your regulations would interact with the Committee's regulations at international checkpoints, since the Committee has full authority over them. I would include something along the lines of the Committee shall issue regulations of this sort.

You will see significant pushback on use of these specific units. There will be all sorts of people telling you that their species, people, etc. need bigger cars, smaller cars, etc. Or that buses aren't the same everywhere.

These criticisms, I think, in this case, are justifiable. How much momentum a car carries is dependent on its speed and mass. How heavy a car is depends heavily on the level of economic development in that nation. For example, in the PRC, in the 1970s, most cars were extremely light because there were few safety features and the nationalised car manufacturers liked to skimp on steel for framing.

Buses, similarly, will have different momenta based on how many people they carry and their size. Double-deckers vs. single-deckers. That specific masses are written in legislation doesn't mean that all masses will conform to the ones specified in the draft.

Moreover, could you justify the use of this 20 degree incidence angle? And the rationale behind why the Assembly should micromanage domestic road restraints? The current resolution focuses almost exclusively on international checkpoints to avoid this 'international issue' problem.

[Jocospor]

How much momentum a car carries is dependent on its speed and mass. How heavy a car is depends heavily on the level of economic development in that nation.

OOC: Not that you were to know, but Riakou works within the engineering sect. I'm sure you can spare him this elementary education.

[Riakou]

I shall respond to queries tomorrow, as it is now 10pm.
I promise I shall get back to you IA and any others who may ask questions as necessary.

[Kenmoria]

“This appears to be very micromanaging, as applying standards with the level of granularity you are suggesting to structures that exist in nearly all of the several thousand WA nations is quite bureaucratic. This is one area that I feel simply isn’t an international issue, but one for national governments to address themselves.”

[Riakou]

I would include something along the lines of the Committee shall issue regulations of this sort.

That is fine.

You will see significant pushback on use of these specific units.

Containment levels are legal minimum requirements, thus ensuring a reasonable minimum safety standard in containing vehicles roadside during collision, they can contain at a greater level but never less.
Working widths however would not be able to be worked outside of, be it more or less due to energy dissipation, thus I shall probably need to amend slightly to ensure these parts are clearer.

For example, in the PRC, in the 1970s, most cars were extremely light because there were few safety features and the nationalised car manufacturers liked to skimp on steel for framing.

Irrelevant.

Buses, similarly, will have different momenta based on how many people they carry and their size. Double-deckers vs. single-deckers. That specific masses are written in legislation doesn't mean that all masses will conform to the ones specified in the draft.

Legal minimum requirements for manufacture ensure that a reasonable standard is held.

could you justify the use of this 20 degree incidence angle? And the rationale behind why the Assembly should micromanage domestic road restraints?

In simplistic terms 20 degrees is selected as it is amongst the worst angle to collide, as due to the nature of vehicle construction, energy is dissipated much more unevenly at this angle thus the point of application of momentum force becomes smaller and the energy transferred is much higher in point of application.
It is logical to test at this angle of collision owing to this consideration.

In very simplistic terms, knives have more penetrating power than hammers.

It seems a reasonable request to minimum safety standards, particularly when certain nations may be irresponsible in this regard.
And considering there are sweeping real life regulations on managing domestic road restraints such within the European Union I’m fairly certain it’s reasonable enough for game.

[Imperium Anglorum]

Where are these minimum requirements for manufacture? And manufacture of what? The cars?

Why should a nation predominantly with light cars use barriers designed for cars far above their weight? Why should my FT puppet build barriers which won't hold back its speed-of-sound hyperloop unobtanium-powered speed dragsters of cars?

[Tinfect]

Why should my FT puppet build barriers which won't hold back its speed-of-sound hyperloop unobtanium-powered speed dragsters of cars?

OOC:
For the love of god, please stop making out FT to be totally unreasonable nonsense in the GA. Its hard enough to get any accommodation at all without you intentionally stoking shit.

[Imperium Anglorum]

Lol Tinfect, I'm making an FT argument. Edit: Nor is this idea that cars will get faster when we replace the human drivers with less error-prone control systems far fetched.

[Riakou]

Where are these minimum requirements for manufacture? And manufacture of what? The cars?

A mistype, I meant minimum requirements for installation, and the road restraints obviously.

Why should a nation predominantly with light cars use barriers designed for cars far above their weight? Why should my FT puppet build barriers which won't hold back its speed-of-sound hyperloop unobtanium-powered speed dragsters of cars?

Having a standardised system would increase clarity, speed of construction and safety, amongst other things.
When it comes to realistic standards of cars even those amongst the lightest weigh around 1t.

With regards to FT, I can’t legislate on something that doesn’t exist.
I think our honourable friend is justified in stating that you are being unreasonable.

[Wallenburg]

Define "road restraint system".

[Riakou]

Define "road restraint system".

Reasonable request, I shall amend and define accordingly in due course

[Araraukar]

OOC: I came to this thread expecting some restrictions on where you can build roads...