49CFR FMVSS Bus emergency exits and window retention and release. S1 Scope. This standard establishes requirements for the retention of windows. This responds to your letter asking about the applicability of Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) No. , Bus Emergency Exits and Window. Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) No. , “Bus emergency exits and window retention and release,” applies to buses, including.
|Published (Last):||18 March 2012|
|PDF File Size:||10.55 Mb|
|ePub File Size:||14.26 Mb|
|Price:||Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]|
This standard establishes requirements for the retention of windows other than windshields in busesand establishes operating forces, opening dimensions, and markings for bus emergency exits. The purpose of this standard is to minimize the likelihood of occupants being thrown from the bus and to provide a means of readily accessible emergency egress.
This standard applies to busesexcept buses manufactured 2217 the purpose of transporting persons under physical restraint. Adjacent seat means a designated seating position located so that some portion of its occupant space is not more than 10 inches from an emergency exit, for a distance of at least 15 inches measured mfvss and parallel to the exit.
Daylight opening means fmsvs maximum unobstructed opening of an emergency exit when viewed from a direction perpendicular to the plane of the opening.
Mid-point of the passenger compartment means any point on a vertical transverse plane bisecting the vehicle longitudinal centerline that extends between the fmvss vertical transverse planes which define the foremost and rearmost limits of the passenger compartment. Occupant space 2177 the space directly above the seat and footwell, bounded vertically by the ceiling and fmvsz by the normally positioned seat back and the nearest obstruction of occupant motion in the direction the seat faces.
Passenger compartment means space within the school bus interior that is between a vertical transverse plane located 76 centimeters in front of the forwardmost passenger seating reference point and a vertical transverse plane tangent to the rear interior wall of the bus at the vehicle centerline.
Post and fmvs bow panel space means the area between two adjacent post and roof bows. Push-out window means a vehicle window fmmvss to open outward to provide for emergency egress. Sliding window means a bus window designed to open by moving vertically or horizontally to provide emergency egress. Wheelchair means a wheeled seat frame for the support and conveyance of a physically disabled person, comprising at least a frame, seat, and wheels.
Wheelchair securement anchorage means the provision for transferring wheelchair securement device loads to the vehicle structure. Wheelchair securement device means a strapwebbing or other device used for securing a wheelchair to the school busincluding all necessary buckles and other fasteners. Except as provided fvmss S5. School buses shall meet the requirements of S5. At least 40 percent of the total required area of unobstructed openings, computed in the above manner, shall be provided on each side of a bus.
However, in tmvss the total unobstructed openings provided by a busno emergency exit, regardless of its area, shall be credited with more than 3, square centimeters of fmvsx total area requirement. Buses with a GVWR of more than 10, pounds shall meet the unobstructed openings requirements in S5. The rear exit shall meet the requirements of S5. When the bus configuration precludes installation of an accessible rear exit, a roof exit that meets the requirements fmss S5.
Buses other than school buses with GVWR of 10, pounds or less may meet the unobstructed openings requirement in S5. Each school bus shall be equipped with the exits specified in either S5. With the lift in the folded or 2177 position, such opening is considered a side emergency exit door. A second side emergency exit door installed pursuant to Table 1 shall be located on the right side of the bus.
In the case of a bus equipped with three side emergency door exits pursuant to Table 1, the third shall be located on the left side of the bus. A second side emergency door exit installed pursuant to Table 2 shall be located on the left side of the bus.
In the case of a bus equipped with three side emergency tmvss exits pursuant to Table 2, the third shall be located on the right side of the bus. A bus equipped with emergency exit windows shall have an even number of such windows, not counting the push-out rear window required by S5. Any side emergency exit windows shall be evenly divided between the right and left sides of the bus. School buses shall not be equipped with horizontally-sliding emergency exit windows.
Further, except for buses equipped with rear push-out emergency exit windows in accordance with S5. The lower edge of the region in Figure 1, and Region B in Figure 2, shall be located 13 centimeters above the adjacent seat, or 5 centimeters above the arm rest, if any, whichever is higher.
For exits with cmvss release mechanism, the exit shall require two force applications to open the exit: One force application shall be applied to the mechanism and another force application shall be applied to open the exit. The force application for the dmvss mechanism must differ by not less than 90 degrees and not more than degrees from the direction of the initial motion to open the exit.
For exits with two release mechanisms, there shall be a total of three force applications to open the exit: One force application shall be applied to each of the two mechanisms to release each mechanism, and another force shall be applied to open the fmvvss. The force application for at least one fmvds the release mechanisms must differ by not less than 90 ffmvss and not more than degrees from the direction of the initial motion to open the exit.
The force applications for the mechanism s must conform to either S5. As shown in Figure 1 or Figure 3. As shown in Figure 2 or Figure 3. Straight and perpendicular 27 the undisturbed exit surface. The release mechanism shall operate without the use of remote controls or tools, and notwithstanding any failure of the vehicle’s power system.
Within the high 27 access region shown in Figure 3A for a side emergency exit door, within the high force access region shown in both Figure 3D 1 and Figure 3D 2 for an interior release mechanism for a rear emergency exit door, and within the high force access region shown in Figure 3D 1 for an exterior release mechanism for a rear emergency exit door. Upward from inside the bus and, at the discretion of the manufacturer, from outside the bus.
Buses with a GVWR of 10, pounds or less shall provide interior release mechanisms that operate by either an upward or pull-type motion. The pull-type motion shall be used only when the release mechanism is recessed in such a manner that the handle, level, or other activating device, before being activated, does not protrude beyond the rim of the recessed receptacle.
Not more than newtons. In the case of windows with one release mechanism, the mechanism shall require two force applications to release the exit. In the case of windows with two release mechanisms, each mechanism shall require one application to release the exit.
Each release mechanism shall operate without the use of remote controls or tools, and notwithstanding any failure gmvss the vehicle’s power system.
Within the low-force access regions shown in Figures 1 and 3 for an emergency exit window. Not more than 89 newtons. Within the high-force access regions shown in Figures 2 and 3 for an emergency exit window. In the case of roof exits with one release mechanism, the mechanism shall require two force applications to release the exit. In 21 case of roof exits with two release mechanisms, each mechanism shall require one application to release the exit.
Within the low force access regions shown in Figure 3B, in the case of buses whose roof exits are not offset from the plane specified in S5.
In the case of buses which have roof exits offset from the plane specified in S5.
USA – Correction of FMVSS 217 bus emergency exits and window retention and release
Within the high force access regions shown in Figure 3B, in the case of buses whose roof exits are not offset from the plane specified in S5. After the release mechanism has been operated, each emergency exit door of a fmvs bus shall, under the conditions of S6.
See Figures 5B and 5C.
B Keeps the door from closing past the point at which the door is perpendicular to the side of the bus bodyregardless of the body’s orientation; and. C Provides a means for release or override.
After the release mechanism has been operated, each emergency roof exit of a school bus shall, under the conditions of S6, before and after the window retention test required by S5.
After the release mechanism has been operated, each emergency exit window of a school bus shall, under the conditions of S6. The marking shall be legible from each of these locations when the other two corresponding locations are occupied. For emergency exit doors, the designation shall be located at the top of, or directly above, the emergency exit door on both the inside and outside surfaces of the bus. The designation for roof exits shall be located on an inside surface of the exit, or within 30 centimeters of the roof exit opening.
For emergency window exits, the designation shall be located at the top of, or directly above, or at the bottom of the emergency window exit on both the inside and outside surfaces of the bus. These instructions shall be in letters at least 1 centimeter high and of a color that contrasts with its background. It is not guaranteed to be accurate or up-to-date, though we do refresh the database weekly. More limitations on accuracy are described at the GPO site.
It will now end on December 10, Toyota Motor North America, Inc. NHTSA has granted Toyota’s petition and proposes to establish appropriate performance requirements to ensure the safe introduction of adaptive driving beam headlighting systems if equipped on newly manufactured vehicles.
ADS testing and development are already underway in several areas of the United States. As technology evolves and in anticipation of requests to test and further develop high and full ADS, including those in vehicles without traditional controls necessary for a human driver, NHTSA is issuing this ANPRM to obtain public comments on the factors and structure that are appropriate for the Agency to consider in designing a national pilot program that will enable it to facilitate, monitor and learn from the testing and development of the emerging advanced vehicle safety technologies and to assure the safety of those activities.
The Agency seeks these comments from interested stakeholders, including State and local authorities, companies, researchers, safety advocates and other experts interested in, engaged in or planning to become engaged in the design, development, testing, and deployment of motor vehicles with high and full driving automation.
The Agency also seeks comments from road users, including vehicle drivers and passengers, cyclists and pedestrians. First, NHTSA seeks comments on potential factors that should be considered in designing a pilot program for the safe on-road testing and deployment of vehicles with high and full driving automation and associated equipment.
Second, the Agency seeks comments on the use of existing statutory provisions and regulations to allow for the implementation of such a pilot program.
Third, the Agency seeks comment on any additional elements of regulatory relief e. Fourth, with respect to the granting of exemptions to enable companies to participate in such a program, the Agency seeks cmvss on the nature of the safety and any other analyses that it should perform in assessing the merits of individual exemption petitions and on the types 2217 terms and conditions it should consider attaching to exemptions to protect public safety and facilitate the Agency’s monitoring and learning from the testing and deployment, while preserving the freedom to innovate.
By developing a robust record of the answers to these important questions, NHTSA expects to learn more about the progress of ADS and the ways in which the Agency can facilitate safe and efficient ADS testing and deployment for the benefit of individual consumers and the traveling public 271 a whole.
NHTSA seeks comments on the economic impact of its regulations on small entities. As required by Section of the Regulatory Flexibility Act, we are attempting to identify rules that may have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.
We also request comments on ways to make these regulations easier to read and understand. The focus of this notification is rules that specifically relate to passenger cars, multipurpose passenger vehicles, trucks, buses, trailers, motorcycles, and motor vehicle equipment. This notification announces the docketing and availability of this research. The comment period fmfss the RFC was originally scheduled to end on March 5, After consideration of the petitions and all supporting information, NHTSA has decided to grant the petitions for four of the discrete changes, deny one, and request comment in a separate document for the sixth proposed change.
This material is intended to better inform the public as they prepare comments in response to the RFC. Public comments are welcome at this meeting, but all should be oral, and any supporting presentations or materials should be submitted to the docket for consideration. This document denies a petition for rulemaking submitted by Mr.
FMVSS & FMVSS – Reflective Solutions
Thompson requested we revise the activation process for red and amber signal warning lamps on school buses to require a new intermediate step during which both colors are activated simultaneously and flash in an alternating pattern and that we decouple the process by which lamps transition to the red-only configuration from the opening of the bus entrance door.
Thompson has not identified a safety need to justify making changes he requested, and Mr. Thompson did not provide persuasive quantitative data to show adopting his requested changes would result in a net benefit to safety. The absence of manual driving controls, and thus of a human driver, poses potential barriers to testing, compliance certification and compliance verification.