Maximum value for front brake regressed specific
torque.
|
Minimum
value for front brake regressed specific torque.
|
Actual friction material performance level.
|
  |
|
Figure 1. Effectiveness
space for Ford Taurus 2000 with height sensing proportioning valve.
FMVSS 105 certified.
Being within the upper and
lower limits, this friction material meets the BMC Effectiveness space
criteria. When a brake is tested using SAE J2430/B.E.E.P.Ó,
test report for a front axle will be always shown as a horizontal line
corresponding to the average of 27 effectiveness ramps applied during
the test. When a rear brake is tested, a vertical line will indicate the
same average on that axle. |
|
Effectiveness space
assessment is based on the Effectiveness ramps run at 50, 100 and 160
kph up to 0.8 g, maximum pedal force of 1,000 N or release speed per the
federal requirement- |
Simplified effectiveness space analysis and performance limits
Figure 1 illustrates the
effectiveness space derived from the vehicle dynamics and hydraulic
system pressure level limits. A given vehicle should be able to meet
stopping distance requirements without exceeding limits on the pedal
force at the same time, based on the FMVSS requirements. The former is
expressed as torque or deceleration level requirements and the latter as
pressure limits.
Figure 1 illustrates the
typical effectiveness space or performance window for a given vehicle.
Each line indicates, for a given regressed specific torque in one brake
(front or rear) what is the minimum regressed specific torque required
on the other. The only exception to this is the UMTRI line that
indicates the maximum level of regressed specific torque on both axles.
In order to obtain torque levels, specific torques values need to be
multiplied by a given pressure, which may vary depending upon the
analysis or limit you need to assess. |
|
|
Basic
mathematical relationships between front and rear axles for performance
limits definition
Basic physical laws of motion
and vehicle dynamics govern the relationship between the braking forces
on both axles of a given vehicle. Even though the general equations are
the same and the federal requirements on which they are based are valid
for vehicles up to 3,500 kg of gross vehicle weight, parameters needed
to determine the specific numerical values are obtained on the vehicle
floor-checks and measurements.
Following we illustrate the
main equations useful for determining the different curves and lines
that create the effectiveness space on a given vehicle. In order to keep
this section simple, analysis is made only for vehicles not equipped
with proportioning valve. Detailed mathematical analysis can be found in
the extensive brake systems literature. [6] And [7]. |
|
Fx = W x a
Equation 1
|
Fx |
Force developed when a mass
changes speed in the longitudinal direction (direction of travel). In
SAE J2430/B.E.E.P.Ó
forces are equated to braking or deceleration forces. |
|
|
W |
Weight undergoing a change in
speed. In SAE J2430/B.E.E.P.Ó
mass can be the gross vehicle weight (curb weight plus driver,
instrumentation and payload up to rated capacity on each axle) or the
lightly loaded vehicle weight (curb weight plus driver,
instrumentation, full fuel tank and 182 kg for FMVSS 105 vehicles [2] or
180 kg for FMVSS 135 vehicles [3]). |
|
|
a |
Rate of change in speed. In
SAE J2430/B.E.E.P.Ó
is taken as declaration up to 0.8g. |
|
|
Multiplying by the tire
rolling radius (rr) on both sides of the equation, we
obtain braking torque for one axle or half vehicle. |
|
M = Fx x rr
= (W x rr x a) / 2
Equation 2 |
M |
Total braking torque for half
the vehicle. Can apply for one axle at a time. |
|
|
Total braking torque in half
the vehicle is equal to the braking torques coming from axles, front and
rear. |
|
M = Mf + Mr
Equation 3 |
M |
Total braking torque
expressed as the sum of both braking torques. |
|
|
Mf
|
Total braking torque on the
front brake. |
|
|
Mr |
Total braking torque on the
rear brake. |
|
|
Dividing torque by the
pressure at the same point in time, we obtain what is called in SAE
J2430/B.E.E.P.Ó
specific torque. This term is equivalent to the brake factor
in FMVSS 135 when calculated as a linear regression. |
|
RST = M / p
or M = RST x p
Equation 4 |
RST |
Regressed specific torque. |
|
|
p |
Pressure at the same point in
time that torque is measured. |
|
|
Replacing equations 2 and 4
on equation 3 gives a generic relation between the specific torques,
pressures and deceleration for half vehicle taking into account front
and rear brakes. |
|
RSTf x p
f + RSTr x p r= (W x rr x a) / 2
Equation 5 |
|
Braking force as a function
of specific torques and hydraulic pressures. When the vehicle is
equipped with a proportioning valve, pressures between front and rear
axles may differ depending upon the pressure level. |
|
|
Performance limits and the effectiveness space
The effectiveness space has
basically four limiting conditions that can be used to assess if a
particular friction material meets the BMC acceptance criteria, giving
consistency with the federal requirements.
The sections from the test
used to assess this performance are: |
|
|
0008: Effect. #1. Post
Burnish at 50 km/h Ramp |
5 stops |
|
|
0009: Effect. #1. Post
Burnish at 100 km/h Ramp |
5 stops |
|
|
0015: Recovery ramp at 100
km/h |
2 stops |
|
|
0017: Final Effectiveness at
50 km/h Ramp |
5 stops |
|
|
0018: Final Effectiveness at
100 km/h Ramp |
5 stops |
|
|
0019: Final Effectiveness at
160 km/h Ramp |
5 stops |
|
|
“To meet
this FMVSS 135 acceptance criterion, a line representing the measured
regressed specific torque average for ramp applications, should fall
within the calculated effectiveness space requirement. The use of a line
emphasizes that effectiveness of the material on the other axle is
typically unknown at the time of a brake job.” [4] |
|
|
·
University
of Michigan Transportation Research Institute (UMTRI) Limit
for maximum pedal gain of 178 N and 1.0 g deceleration level at the
lightly loaded vehicle weight. The purpose of this limit is to establish
a level at which a friction material would become too effective and
would make braking uncomfortable or too prone to locking even at low
decelerations levels encountered in regular driving situations. The
UMTRI effectiveness limit was based on an extensive research performed
on vehicles tested under FMVSS test codes. |
|
RSTf x p
f
UMTRI
+ RSTr
x p r
UMTRI
=
( WLLVW
x rr x a UMTRI) / 2
Equation 6 |
|
General equation for relating
front and rear regressed specific torques based on the UMTRI values. |
|
|
p f
UMTRI |
Pressure at the front brake
at 178 N pedal force. |
|
|
p r
UMTRI
|
Pressure at the rear brake at
178 N pedal force. |
|
|
WLLVW |
Lightly loaded vehicle
weight. |
|
|
a
UMTRI |
Deceleration level for the
UMTRI limit taken as 1.0g |
|
|
No
intersecting point for a front and rear brakes combination is considered
feasible above this line. For front brakes tested independently,
the line representing the averaged regressed specific torque should not
be above the intersecting point between the FMVSS stopping distance
limit and the UMTRI line. |
|
|
·
FMVSS
No-power assist stopping distance limit.
The full deceleration developed by the brake (braking torque) should be
able to stop a vehicle in 168 m from an initial speed of 100 kph without
exceeding a pedal force of 667 N on FMVSS 105 or 500 N on FMVSS 135
certified vehicles at its gross vehicle weight with the power assist
system fully depleted. Using the vehicle dynamics equations defined in
the FMVSS code, the following relationship between stopping distance,
initial speed, deceleration and reaction time can be established. |
|
a NP = V2
/ [ 2 x (X NP – 0.72 x V / 2)]
Equation 7 |
a NP |
Average deceleration after
reaction time or ramp time is elapsed. The term 0.72 x V / 2
accounts for the increased traveled distance during the drivers
reaction time. In SAE J2430/B.E.E.P.Ó
testing this distance is compensated by the ramp time required to get to
the target deceleration. aNP is
required to be 0.249g following the FMVSS requirements. |
|
|
V |
Initial vehicle speed at the
start of the braking operation. 96.6 km/h for FMVSS 105 vehicles and 100
km/h for FMVSS 135 certified vehicles. |
|
|
X NP |
Maximum allowable stopping
distance. 139 m for FMVSS 105 vehicles and 168 m for FMVSS 135 certified
vehicles. |
|
RSTf x
p f NP + RSTr x p rNP
=
( WGVW
x rr
x a
NP
) / 2
Equation 8 |
|
General equation for relating
front and rear regressed specific torques based on the FMVSS no-power
assist stopping distance limit. |
|
|
p f
NP |
Pressure with power assist
fully depleted at the front brake at 667 N pedal force for FMVSS 105
certified vehicles and 500 N pedal force for FMVSS 135 vehicles |
|
|
p r
NP
|
Pressure with power assist
fully depleted at the rear brake at 667 N pedal force for FMVSS 105
certified vehicles and 500 N pedal force for FMVSS 135 vehicles |
|
|
No
intersecting point should fall on the left side of this limit.
In any
case, front axle regressed specific torque shall not fall below the
intersecting point of this limit and the FMVSS brake balance limit.
even for ABS or FMVSS 105 vehicles. If this happens, it would mean brake
is not capable of meeting the no-power assist stopping distance due to
rear wheel lock-up and the consequential reduced total braking force. |
|
|
·
FMVSS
stopping distance limit.
The federal requirement states that a vehicle shall be capable of
stopping in 70 m or less from an initial speed of 100 kph and initial
brake temperature at or below 100 oC for an FMVSS 135
certified vehicle at its gross vehicle weight. This line can be a
straight or curved line. Straight-line limits apply to vehicles not
equipped with proportioning valves or vehicles using height sensing
proportioning valves. Curved-line limit apply to vehicles with
proportioning valve. |
|
a SD = V2
/ [ 2 x (X SD – 0.72 x V / 2)]
Equation 7 |
a SD |
Average deceleration after
reaction time or ramp time is elapsed. The term 0.72 x V / 2
accounts for the increased traveled distance during the drivers
reaction time. In SAE J2430/B.E.E.P.Ó
testing this distance is in fact compensated for the ramp time required
to get to the target deceleration. aSD
is calculated as 0.656g following the FMVSS requirements.
|
|
|
V |
Initial vehicle speed at the
start of the braking operation. 96.6 km/h for FMVSS 105 vehicles and 100
km/h for FMVSS 135 certified vehicles. |
|
|
X SD |
Maximum allowable stopping
distance. 62.2 m for FMVSS 105 vehicles and 70 m for FMVSS 135 certified
vehicles. |
|
RSTf =
RSTr x (1-Φ) / Φ
Equation 8 |
|
General equation for relating
front and rear regressed specific torques based on the FMVSS no-power
assist stopping distance limit. For vehicles equipped with proportioning
valve, additional mathematical analysis is required. |
|
Φ = Tr / Tt
Equation 9 |
|
Braking torque distribution
calculated using a peak friction value of 0.9 and a deceleration of
0.656g. Peak friction also represents the ratio between the horizontal
braking force and the vertical load, applied on the wheel. The vertical
load comprises static loading plus dynamic weight transfer due to
deceleration. |
|
|
Tr
|
Front brake torque. See
equation 2 |
|
|
Tt |
Total braking torque for half
vehicle. See equation 2 |
|
|
No
intersecting point should fall on the left side of this limit. |
|
|
FMVSS brake balance limit.
During the ramp
applications up to 0.8 g deceleration, vehicle should not exhibit a rear
brake lock up prior to lock up in the front wheels. Vehicles certified
to FMVSS 105 do not need to fulfill this requirement. FMVSS 135
certified vehicles equipped with ABS could exhibit an impending rear
lock-up condition, shown as an intersecting point between front and rear
regressed specific torque lines on the rigth hand side of this line.
|
|
RSTf =
RSTr x (1-Φ) / Φ
Equation 10 |
|
General equation for relating
front and rear regressed specific torques based on the FMVSS brake
balance limit. For vehicles equipped with proportioning valve,
additional mathematical analysis is required. |
|
Φ = Tr / Tt
Equation 11 |
|
Braking torque distribution
calculated using a deceleration of 0.8g. |
|
|
No
intersecting point should fall on the right side of this limit
for vehicles FMVSS 135 certified not equipped with ABS. FMVSS 135
certified vehicles equipped with ABS could exhibit an impending rear
lock-up condition, shown as an intersecting point between front and rear
regressed specific torque lines on the rigth hand side of this line. |
|
In SAE J2430/B.E.E.P.Ó
pedal force limits are expressed as hydraulic pressure levels- |
Cold
Effectiveness
Cold Effectiveness assessment
serves the purpose of determining the brake capability to meet the
stopping distance requirement without exceeding the maximum allowable
pedal force on the FMVSS. See figure 2.
Test section used to assess
this criteria is: |
|
|
0010: Post
Burnish Cold Effectiveness |
6 stops
|
|
|
“To meet
this criterion, each of the six cold effectiveness stops should meet the
specified sustained torque within a prescribed maximum pressure
corresponding to the FMVSS specified pedal force.”
[4] |
   |
|
Figure 2. Cold
Effectiveness assessment.
With actual pressure required
lower than the maximum allowed, this friction material meets the BMC
Cold Effectiveness criteria. |
|
Fade snubs are used to
heat the brakes for assessing its effectiveness at high temperature. |
Fade
snubs
Fade snubs assessment serves
the purpose of determining the brake capability to meet the FMVSS
heating cycle requirement without exceeding the maximum allowable pedal
force. See figure 3.
Test section used to assess
this criteria is: |
|
|
0011: Fade Heating Cycles |
15 snubs
|
|
|
“To meet
this acceptance criterion, each fade snub should meet the specified
sustained torque within the applicable pedal force requirement.” [4]
|
  |
|
Figure 3. Fade snubs
assessment. With
actual pressure required lower than the maximum allowed, this friction
material meets the BMC fade snubs criteria. |
|
Hot Effectiveness is
useful to assess how a friction material performs at high temperatures. |
Hot
Effectiveness stops
Hot Effectiveness stops are
performed immediately following the heating snubs. They are based also
on stopping distance requirements and pedal force limits. See figure 4.
·
First stop is
run with a pressure control from the best cold effectiveness stop. For
this purpose, since all cold effectiveness stops are run at the same
torque level, the best cold effectiveness is the one requiring the least
amount of sustained pressure.
·
Second stop is
run at the maximum allowable pedal force: 667 N for FMVSS 105 certified
vehicles and 500 N for FMVSS 135 vehicles.
Test section used to assess
this criteria is: |
|
|
0012: Hot Performance
Effectiveness |
2 stops
|
|
|
“Acceptance criteria for both hot stops are that the sustained torque
meet or exceed 60% of the six stop average cold effectiveness sustained
specific torque.” [4] |
Lowest cold effectiveness pressure.
|
60% of cold effectiveness average torque.
|
Actual torque developed by
the brake
|
 |
|
Figure 4. Hot
effectiveness stops assessment. Lower left hand window.
With actual torque output higher than the minimum level required, this
friction material meets the BMC hot effectiveness criteria. |
|
FMVSS tests or SAE J2430/B.E.E.P.Ó
are not intended to replicate regular street driving conditions |
Structural integrity
Experience shows that a
material should be able to withstand the different stops with its
corresponding speed, torque and temperature stresses seen during the
test.
This structural integrity
assessment is performed normally at the end of the test by visual
inspection |
|
|
“To meet
this criterion, tested friction parts should exhibit no detachment or
fracture other than minor surface cracks that do not impair attachment
of the friction facing. Friction facing tear out (complete detachment of
the lining) should not exceed 10% of the lining on any single friction
element.”
[4] |
|
FMVSS test are used to
assess safety and regulatory compliance. SAE J2430/B.E.E.P.Ó
testing is consistent with the FMVSS requirements. |
BMC
acceptance criteria summary
Standard SAE J2430/B.E.E.P.Ó
test report includes a summary table that clearly indicates the
acceptance criteria. This gives a quick summary of the different BMC
acceptance criteria as to where to focus for additional detailed
analysis or further testing. See figures 5 and 6.
Users of a typical test
report are strongly encouraged to read and understand the report beyond
the simple review of the criteria table.
Since SAE J2430/B.E.E.P.Ó
does not use a reference material on the other axle, certain materials
give repeatability as high as 95% on several tests, run several years
apart. |
|
 |
 |
|
Figure 5. Friction
material complying with all the BMC acceptance criteria. |
Figure 6. Friction
material not complying with all the BMC acceptance criteria. |
|
SAE J2430/B.E.E.P.Ó
test report is delivered as an
e-Report via e-mail- |
SAE
J2430/B.E.E.P.Ó
tabular test report. Figures 7-10
Besides the initial pages of
the test report that gives details on the test conditions, and the
graphical pages, tabular pages give detailed values for each stop,
except for every 10 stops in the burnish. |
|
Test
report column header description |
|
Test report header |
Description |
Range or value reported |
|
STOP |
Stop number within a given
section |
Stop number |
|
INISP |
Initial speed (km/h) |
Speed at start of brake
applies |
|
FNLSP |
Final speed (km/h) |
At end of data collection.
Varies with type of brake apply |
|
DIST |
Stopping distance (m) |
From brake apply to end of
data collection |
|
CYCL |
Cycle time (s) |
From start of one brake apply
to the start of the next |
|
SUSTQ |
Sustained torque by distance
(N m) |
Torque averaged by distance
using the mean fully developed deceleration (after 97% of setpoint),
brake inertia and rolling radius |
|
AVGTQ |
Average torque by distance (N
m) |
Torque averaged by distance
for the data collection range. |
|
MXTQ |
Maximum torque (N m) |
Maximum torque during the
brake applies data collection |
|
SUPR |
Sustained pressure by
distance (kPa) |
Pressure averaged by distance
from 97% of setpoint to end of data collection range |
|
AVPR |
Average pressure by distance
(kPa) |
Pressure averaged by distance
for the data collection range |
|
MXPR |
Maximum pressure (kPa) |
Maximum pressure during the
brake applies data collection |
|
AVSPTQ |
Specific torque averaged by
distance (N m/kPa) |
Average torque divided by
average pressure |
|
ROTI |
Initial rotor or drum
temperature (oC) |
Rotor or drum temperature at
start of brake apply |
|
ROTF |
Final rotor or drum
temperature (oC) |
Rotor or drum temperature 5 s
after brake release |
|
T2F |
Final primary/leading/ inner
temperature (oC) |
Temperature on the specific
friction material 5 s after brake release |
|
T3F |
Final
secondary/trailing/outer temperature (oC) |
Temperature on the specific
friction material 5 s after brake release |
|
RGSPTQ |
Regressed specific torque (N
m/kPa) |
Regression analysis to find
the best linear fit for the torque over pressure ratio |
|
PHO |
Hold off pressure (kPa). This
is a calculated, not a measured value. The closer to 0 the more stable
the friction material is. |
Calculated pressure for 0
torque based on the linear regression |
|
R2 |
Coefficient of determination.
The closer to 1 the more stable the brake is. |
Average ratio between actual
and calculated values of the regression for specific torque |
|
INERTIA |
Brake inertia (kg m2) |
Calculated brake inertia
using the work performed during the data collection range. (Work is
taken as the reduction in kinetic energy and absorbed by the brake) |
|

Regressed
specific torque, hold-off pressure and correlation are given only for
ramps.
|
For ramp
applies, when final speed is higher than 8 km//h, means the brake reached
first a pressure or a torque limit.
|
Sustained
levels should always be higher than average levels.
For ramp
sections, sustained values are not indicated.
|
|
Figure 7. Tabular data for
Instrument Check sections
·
Instrument
check stops are useful for verifying proper dynamometer control program
settings.
·
Torque control
instrument check stops are also used to assess torque variation and
hardware conditions especially in drum brakes.
·
Ramps are
applied as pressure ramps corresponding to 135 N/s pedal force ramps.
Link Testing Labs., Inc. control software can resemble proportioning
valve and booster runout within 5% accuracy compared to the actual
vehicle’s hydraulic system.
·
Sections 5 and
6 can be also used to assess what is called “Green Effectiveness” in the
material. Comparison with ramp sections post-burnish (sections 8 and 9)
and final ramps (sections 17, 18 and 19) can give a detailed assessment
of burnish sensitivity, post-fade sensitivity and speed sensitivity (50,
100 and 160 km/h)
·
Burnish section
goes right after these instruments check sections. |
This material
exhibits a very stable performance at different speeds and for the whole
ramp portion.
|

Heating cycles
take the rotor or drum from 55 oC up to temperatures sometimes
higher than 600 oC
|
FMVSS requires
sustained torque to be 60% or higher then the cold Effectiveness average
|
|
Figure 8. Tabular data for
effectiveness, cold effectiveness, fade heating snubs and hot
effectiveness sections.
·
Cold
Effectiveness is one of the most important sections during the test. It
has a specific BMC criterion that applies to it and is the basis for the
hot performance section and assessment.
·
In-stop data
analysis is a very useful tool for development engineers, raw material
suppliers and formulation designers. Link Engineering Co. software
Revdata Plus is available upon request for this purpose.
·
Fade snubs
final temperature and specific torque variation during the section,
sheds light regarding the temperature performance for the friction
material and the impact of different raw materials.
·
An increasing
pressure requirement means a higher pedal force required at high
temperature stops during regular driving. |
|
Column header
description is given at the end of the test report
|
Speed
sensitivity can be seen, as higher pressure required getting to the same
torque level.
RGSTQ shows the
same behavior.
|

|
|
Figure 9. Reburnish and
final effectiveness sections.
·
Reburnish is
used to recondition the brakes for the final effectiveness sections.
·
Final
effectiveness provides also insight regarding speed sensitivity up to
160 km/h.
·
A stable
material, should exhibit little variation after the heating sections on
the torque output or effectiveness values (expressed as specific
torque).
·
SAE J2430/B.E.E.P.Ó
test report also has an exception report to pinpoint main variation
during the test from test procedure requirements regarding pressure,
temperature, cycle time and sustained torque levels. |
|
 |
|
Figure 10. Wear
information.
·
Even though SAE
J2430/B.E.E.P.Ó
is not a wear test, detailed analysis of the wear characteristics of the
friction material and also the wear imposed on the rotor or drum can be
very valuable.
·
For formulation
comparison or process stability analysis, wear comparison between
different tests can be performed.
·
Detailed wear
thickness measurements and weight loss are given for brake pads or brake
linings, rotor or drum. Thickness and weight loss are given too along
with roughness data.
·
Since SAE
J2430/B.E.E.P.Ó
does not use a reference material, energy input is always the same for
tests performed on the same vehicle. Also SAE J2430/B.E.E.P.Ó
test is performed with new original equipment hardware and components. |
Brake Manufacturers Council
Members
Akebono Corporation
Anstro Manufacturing, Inc.
Balatas American Brakeblok
Better Brake Parts, Inc.
Capital Tool and Design Limited
Consorcio Mexicano de Empresas, S.A.
Continental Teves
Dana Corporation
Delphi Energy & Chassis
DMC Technical Products
Fasa Friction Laboratories Inc.
Federal-Mogul Corporation
Fricciones Tecnicas Y Maquinados S.A.
Friction Division Products, Inc.
Hawk Performance
Group
Hemispheres International Mfg. Co.
Honeywell
Morse Automotive Corporation
MSC Laminates and Composites Inc.
Nisshinbo Automotive Corporation
Nucap Industries Inc.
Performance Friction Corporation
Robert Bosch Corporation
Sumitomo Electric Automotive, Inc.
Tabco Auto Brake Co. Ltd.
TMD Friction, Inc.
TRW
Universal Automotive Industries
|
Who is
behind SAE J2430/B.E.E.P.Ó
About SAE
What do cars, aircraft,
trucks, off-highway equipment,
engines, materials, manufacturing, and fuels have in common? SAE.
The Society of Automotive Engineers is your one-stop resource for
technical information and expertise used in designing, building,
maintaining, and operating self-propelled vehicles for use on land or
sea, in air or space.
Who we are & what we do
Nearly 80,000 engineers,
business executives, educators, and students from more than 97 countries
form our network of
members
who share information and exchange ideas for advancing the engineering
of mobility systems. More than 16,000 volunteer leaders serve on our
Board of
Directors and our many other
boards, councils
and committees. Our
technical
committees write more new aerospace and automotive
engineering
standards
than any other standards-writing organization in the world. We publish
thousands of technical
papers
and
book
each year, and leading-edge
periodicals
and
Internet and
CD-ROM products too. Our
Cooperative
Research Program helps facilitate projects that benefit the
mobility industry as a whole. Numerous
meetings and
expositions provide worldwide opportunities to network and
share information. We also offer a full complement of
professional
development activities such as seminars, workshops, and
continuing education programs. The meetings and activities of
local sections
provide an opportunity to network with colleagues near you.
About MEMA
Founded in 1904, MEMA
exclusively represents and serves more than 700 North American
manufacturers of motor vehicle components, tools and equipment,
automotive chemical and related products used in the production, repair,
and maintenance of all classes of motor vehicles. MEMA is headquartered
in Research Triangle Park, N.C., and has offices in Washington, D.C.;
Yokohama, Japan; Brussels, Belgium; Mexico City, Mexico; and Sao Paulo,
Brazil. The Original Equipment Suppliers Association (OESA), MEMA’s
affiliate association that serves automotive original equipment
suppliers exclusively, is located in Troy, Michigan.
About the
Brake Manufacturers Council (BMC)
Established in 1973, The
Brake Manufacturers Council is dedicated to:
Providing and maintaining,
for the mutual benefit of all its members, communications as appropriate
with federal, state and local governmental authorities, bodies and
agencies, in short, authorities - such as NHTSA - with legislative or
regulatory function whose actions may affect automotive brake parts or
systems.
Obtaining and disseminating
to members information on topics of interest to the brake parts
industry.
Conducting any further
activities as may be appropriate and for the common benefit of
manufacturers of automotive brake parts or systems. |
|
|
|
Bibliography |
|
[1] |
Society of Automotive
Engineers, Inc. SAE BRAKE DYNAMOMETER TEST CODE STANDARDS COMMITTEE.
“SAE J2430 issued 1999-08. Dynamometer Effectiveness Characterization
for Passenger Cars and Light Duty Truck Brake Friction Products.”
Warrendale, PA 15096 |
|
[2] |
NHTSA. “FMVSS 105 hydraulic
and electric brake systems” October 1st. 1997 edition.
Baltimore, MD 21201 |
|
[3] |
NHTSA. “FMVSS 135 Light
vehicles brake systems”. Baltimore, MD 21201 |
|
[4] |
Brake Manufacturers Council.
“Aftermarket Friction Product Effectiveness Characterization Guide”.
Research Triangle Park, NC 27709-3966 |
|
[5] |
Society of Automotive
Engineers, Inc. Jim Trainor and others. SAE Technical Paper 2001-01-3120
“SAE J2430 Recommended Practice and its application for Characterizing
Aftermarket Brake Friction Material Effectiveness.” Warrendale, PA 15096 |
|
[6] |
Robert Bosch GmbH, 2000
“Automotive Handbook 5th Edition”. Postfach 30 02 20,
Stuttgart, Germany |
|
[7] |
Society of Automotive
Engineers, Inc. Rudolph Limpert. “Brake design and safety” Warrendale,
PA 15096 |
|
Useful
web sites for literature or additional information |
|
SAE |
www.sae.org |
|
MEMA |
www.mema.org |
|
BMC |
www.brakecouncil.org |
|
NHTSA |
www.nhtsa.gov |
|
Link Engineering Co.
|
www.linkeng.com |
|
Link Testing
Laboratories., Inc. |
www.linktestlab.com |