URGENT RESPONSE Needed to Save All MBs in Oz Before June 30

Discussion in 'General Questions' started by Irish John, May 23, 2009.

Tags: Add Tags
  1. Irish John

    Irish John Guest

    I'm starting a new thread for these Draft Regs issued by the RTA on Friday 22 May. We have until 30 June to respond so I suggest we keep our comments relevant to a response. I'll be listing my suggested responses in point form when I've finished reading through the report. These regs will be adopted Australia wide by all State Govts. The report is very depressing reading and if adopted in the proposed form will render every Australian MB illegal. Fortunately the report contains weaknesses and misinformation and it shouldn't be too hard to formulate a pretty persuasive response but the RTA are not noted for taking notice of user groups nor for consulting with stakeholders.
    This will be depressing reading for most of us and I am personally incredibly depressed by what I've read in the report. As it stands it will kill any realistic sustainable alternative method of transport and it basically ensures that no motor assisted pedal cycle will be any faster than an ordinary pushie. It will also give the slow electric bikes a monopoly protected by law. I need to read it again thoroughly.

  2. wanderer33

    wanderer33 New Member

    Personally, what can i say?
    we're not supposed to say anything political here but
    the problem you're talking about is anything but....
    I lived for decades in oz till 11 years ago and came across MB in early 80s as a merchant
    marine,in Sth Korea and wanted to bring one back but they were illegal back then so I
    don't, it only must've been allowed under Howard liberal government to have motors on
    bikes, now, you should ask yourselves how many of you, not only MBcs, voted for your present famous government, and thank yourselves as you brought it on your self as
    Como or socialist governments are not there to make our lives easy
  3. Irish John

    Irish John Guest

    This isn't being driven by any political party it is being driven by a Govt department that has had these regs in the pipeline for a long time. Govt departments are a law unto themselves. For example your immigration dept and ours have been waging a private war between each other for as long as I can remember despite our Govts being on the very best of terms. They harrass each others citizens frequently and get away with it.
    Last edited by a moderator: May 23, 2009
  4. fetor56

    fetor56 Guest

    I'll read through it John & get back to ya.....knowing Govts the way i do(cos i was in the Govt for 12 yrs) any decisions have already been made.
  5. Irish John

    Irish John Guest

    I'll have as many points as I can think of listed by Monday night our time. Wonder can Bolts have a squizzy through this as well. I'll drop him a PM.
    HybriDude is going to help as well. I don't think we amount to many and we could probably hold our meetings in a phone kiosk!
  6. runnamuc

    runnamuc New Member

    we should get onto our bald mate in the greens and let him know how much more enviromentaly friendly the mb is than owning a second car

    "of course i love you more than her darlin"
  7. BoltsMissing

    BoltsMissing Active Member

    can someone copy and paste the entire PDF file so we can pick it to pieces ?
  8. Irish John

    Irish John Guest

    Doesn't paste real well Bolts. Better to save file to your hard drive and read it in Acrobat.

    May 2009
    Power-Assisted Pedal Cycles - Proposal for a new AB vehicle definition
    May 2009 2
    Executive Summary.............................................................................................................................................. 3
    Critical Items..................................................................................................................................................... 4
    Background ............................................................................................................................................................ 5
    Purpose................................................................................................................................................................... 5
    Proposed Definition............................................................................................................................................. 6
    Proposed Definitions to be incorporated into the ADRs ....................................................................... 6
    Appendix A - Detailed Rationale ...................................................................................................................... 7
    General Comments ......................................................................................................................................... 7
    Is there a need to pedal to obtain assistance from the motor? ............................................................. 7
    1. No need to pedal to obtain assistance from the motor ................................................................. 7
    2. Need to pedal to obtain assistance from the motor ....................................................................... 8
    3. Pedalling is required to get motor assistance after reaching a minimum speed on motor
    only ................................................................................................................................................................. 8
    Pedal or throttle activation............................................................................................................................ 8
    Maximum power output................................................................................................................................. 9
    Analysis of the impact of power output on maximum speed...........................................................10
    Where to measure power .......................................................................................................................14
    Effect of peak power and continuous power on electric motors ...................................................15
    Maximum Assisted Speed.............................................................................................................................16
    Prescription of the power source...............................................................................................................17
    Identification plate or label ...........................................................................................................................18
    General notes on safety ....................................................................................................................................20
    Additional weight of PAPCs .........................................................................................................................20
    Impact with a vulnerable road user........................................................................................................21
    Increased braking distance.......................................................................................................................21
    Literature review on bicycle safety.............................................................................................................22
    Relevance to PAPC...................................................................................................................................25
    Transition to new definition and treatment of existing power-assisted pedal cycles..........................26
    Proposed next steps ..........................................................................................................................................26
    Appendix B - Overseas requirements ............................................................................................................27
    New Zealand - Extract from the New Zealand Land Transport website.........................................27
    European Union - Extract from the European Commission website ................................................27
    Implementation of a new PAPC standard in Europe including magnetic compatibility ..............28
    USA - Extract from Public Law...................................................................................................................29
    Japan - Based on an extract from a conference on bicycles in Taipei................................................30
    Japan - Amendment to the definition to allow higher assistance on hills at low speed.............30
    Appendix C - Example of power-assisted pedal cycles conforming to various legislation .................31
    Power-Assisted Pedal Cycles - Proposal for a new AB vehicle definition
    May 2009 3
    Executive Summary
    This paper is the latest step of a series of initiatives to develop a national strategy in Australia to
    apply consistent design standards and registration requirements for power-assisted pedal cycles
    (PAPCs). A new definition is recommended along with the appropriate justification and analysis
    with the emphasis on road safety.
    The preferred definition for discussion is:
    A pedal cycle [vehicle designed to be propelled through a mechanism solely by human
    power] to which is attached one or more auxiliary propulsion motors having a combined
    maximum continuous rated power not exceeding 250 watts, of which the output is
    progressively reduced and finally cut off as the vehicle reaches a speed of 25
    km/h, or sooner, if the cyclist stops pedalling.
    This would replace the current definition:
    A pedal cycle to which is attached one or more auxiliary propulsion motors having a
    combined maximum power output not exceeding 200 watts.
    The reasons for the need to pedal in order to get assistance from the motor(s) are detailed as is
    the lack of specification for the type of motor activation. The effect of power assistance on
    maximum speed has been analysed before deciding on the maximum value of 250 watts and opting
    for not restricting power assistance up to a maximum speed. It does not specify a type of power
    source in order to avoid restricting the design and future development of PAPCs. To facilitate
    enforcement, it is proposed to require a permanent label to be affixed to PAPCs.
    A literature review on pedal cycle safety has been undertaken to assess the impact of PAPCs on
    road safety, especially regarding their interaction with pedestrians, the effect of an increased
    travelling speed while going uphill and a possible increase in the number of cyclists due to the
    reduced physical effort needed to ride a PAPC compared to a pedal cycle. The conclusion is that
    the road safety benefits of PAPCs should not be negative, although it is emphasised that only
    limited literature is available on which to base this claim on.
    Finally, a review of the existing regulations in several countries was carried out to assess whether
    the proposed definition would facilitate free trade. The proposed definition would allow the
    import of vehicles built to the European and Japanese markets, the two biggest markets outside
    China. Australian manufacturers could also build products compliant to both the proposed
    definition and the European and Japanese regulations, although this would not be necessary to sell
    products only in Australia.
    Power-Assisted Pedal Cycles - Proposal for a new AB vehicle definition
    May 2009 4
    Critical Items
    Items that are most likely to instigate discussions are:
    Should the rider need to pedal to obtain assistance from the motor?
    - Simplest and arguably the only effective way to ensure that a vehicle is designed to be
    propelled through a mechanism by human power.
    - Existing PAPC could not continue to be sold.
    - Allows clear distinction between a bona fide PAPC and one with pedals as a simple
    - Allows a closer alignment to the European and Japanese definitions.
    Should electric motors only be allowed?
    - This restriction would make the Australian definition closer to harmonisation with the
    European and Japanese standards. In Europe and Japan, only electric motors are
    - Internal combustion (IC) engines are noisier than electric motors.
    - It is unclear how many, if any, IC engines on the market are generating less than 250
    - Mandating a particular power source restricts possible innovations.
    - The main objective from a road safety point of view is to limit the power output, not
    the type of power source.
    - A Regulatory Impact Statement is likely to be undertaken to assess the impact of this
    Should motor assistance cut at a determined speed?
    - A 250 watt power limit maintains the maximum speed on level ground within the limits
    of most unassisted pedal cycles.
    - A maximum assisted speed could prevent some riders from travelling faster than
    without assistance on level grounds.
    - This restriction may make the Australian definition closer to harmonisation with the
    European and Japanese definitions. In Europe and Japan, a maximum assisted speed is
    - A Regulatory Impact Statement is likely to be undertaken to assess the impact of this
    Power-Assisted Pedal Cycles - Proposal for a new AB vehicle definition
    May 2009 5
    Since the beginning of the exemption from registration of power-assisted pedal cycles thirty years
    ago, the range of models of these vehicles have expanded enormously: from kits which can be
    attached to vehicles, to pedal cycles powered with motors in excess of 200 watts through to
    larger scooter-type vehicles which are deliberately marketed as not requiring pedalling while not
    needing registration nor driver licence. Many of these vehicles have caused enforcement problems.
    NSW Police are unable to readily determine which vehicles are entitled to the registration
    exemption or to enforce the safe use of motorised vehicles in places, such as cycle paths, which
    are normally set aside for bicycles. At the same time, concerns about traffic congestion,
    environmental impacts of conventional vehicles and growing interest in healthier lifestyles have
    coalesced to focus attention on the place of power-assisted pedal cycles in the current transport
    To address these issues, the RTA released a Discussion Paper on power-assisted pedal cycles in
    February 2008, Better regulation of motor assisted pedal cycles: issues and solutions paper. It was
    intended that this paper would be developed to form a national strategy to apply consistent design
    standards and registration requirements for PAPCs.
    To help progress the paper into a formal strategy, the New South Wales Roads and Traffic
    Authority (RTA) convened a workshop on 28 July 2008 in Sydney. Representative from Australian
    Jurisdictions, bicycle supply interests, Australia Post and the NSW Police attended the workshop.
    Following that workshop there was an agreement that there needs to be a revised standard and
    description of the characteristics of a power-assisted pedal cycle that is exempt from registration
    without creating a new category of vehicle. The RTA undertook the development of a description
    of these characteristics, circulate this to other jurisdictions and interested parties for comment,
    and then seek consistent adoption of this description.
    This paper discusses the proposed characteristics for PAPCs to develop a new definition that will
    be included in the Australian Design Rules (ADR) definitions and subsequently in the Road Rules
    referring to the ADRs. This proposed definition will be circulated to other Jurisdictions and
    interested parties for comment and, ultimately, to enable consistent adoption across Australia.
    The analyses carried out in this paper assume that PAPCs will continue to be considered as a form
    of pedal cycle in all Jurisdictions' Road Rules. Discussions regarding possible registration or
    licensing of PAPCs are not further examined.
    Power-Assisted Pedal Cycles - Proposal for a new AB vehicle definition
    May 2009 6
    Proposed Definition
    Proposed Definitions to be incorporated into the ADRs
    1.1.1. PEDAL CYCLE (AA)
    A vehicle designed to be propelled through a mechanism solely by human power.
    A pedal cycle [vehicle designed to be propelled through a mechanism solely by
    human power] to which is attached one or more auxiliary propulsion motors having
    a combined maximum continuous rated power not exceeding 250 watts, of
    which the output is progressively reduced and finally cut off as the
    vehicle reaches a speed of 25 km/h, or sooner, if the cyclist stops
    Further details about the rationale for this proposed definition are included in Appendix A.
    Power-Assisted Pedal Cycles - Proposal for a new AB vehicle definition
    May 2009 7
    Appendix A - Detailed Rationale
    General Comments
    Firstly, this Paper is looking specifically at PAPC and is not investigating the practicality of powerassisted
    cycles without pedals. These vehicles are currently considered as mopeds, however
    Jurisdictions may wish to develop a new category for powered assisted cycles without pedals.
    Secondly, the proposed definition for discussion has a similar form to the current definition as it
    refers to the term 'pedal cycle', but defines it in square brackets to avoid the requirement to read
    two definitions in conjunction to fully understand what is a PAPC. The agreed definition should be
    less likely to create confusion, convey the stakeholders' understanding of what is a PAPC and
    facilitate enforcement.
    Thirdly, this Paper is based on current technology and the investigation of the requirements in
    other countries. A list of these requirements is presented in Appendix B.
    Is there a need to pedal to obtain assistance from the motor?
    Objective: To make sure that PAPCs are fundamentally pedal cycles, vehicles designed to be
    propelled through a mechanism solely by human power, to which is attached one or more
    auxiliary propulsion motors.
    Three different conditions for obtaining assistance from the motor were considered in defining a
    1. No need to pedal to obtain assistance from the motor
    This would make the verification that a vehicle is fundamentally designed to be propelled by human
    power more difficult. Many existing PAPC could continue to be sold as this is compatible with the
    current definition.
    There is a possibility to include requirements or guidelines at Jurisdiction level to help the
    interpretation of 'designed to be propelled through a mechanism solely by human power'. If the
    creation of such guidelines is the preferred option, consistency across the States and Territories is
    essential. The guidelines could be similar to one or a combination of the following:
    - The rider must be able to pedal the PAPC on a level surface for two minutes continuously,
    - A maximum pedal crank width,
    - Adjustability of seat post,
    - Suitable gearing, and
    - Maximum weight.
    It is not believed that these criteria would be truly effective at discerning vehicles that are bona
    fide pedal cycles, compared to the requirement to pedal to get motor assistance. There is also a
    possibility that these guidelines put undesired restrictions to the design of PAPCs. Additionally, it
    would need to be proven that pedalling or not on a PAPC with 250 watts of power assistance has
    an effect on safety.
    Power-Assisted Pedal Cycles - Proposal for a new AB vehicle definition
    May 2009 8
    2. Need to pedal to obtain assistance from the motor
    This is the simplest and arguably the only effective way to ensure that a vehicle is designed to be
    propelled through a mechanism by human power. This requirement would also allow for a closer
    alignment to the European and Japanese definitions that require pedalling in order to get motor
    assistance. Additionally, it could be argued that having a stricter requirement will force people who
    would otherwise not be constrained to undergo training and licensing intended for heavier
    machines. There are unintended consequences about this policy, notably the fact that existing
    PAPC could not continue to be sold as most of them would not meet this new requirement.
    3. Pedalling is required to get motor assistance after reaching a minimum
    speed on motor only
    In addition to the benefits and disadvantages of the second option, a power-only start-up would
    make acceleration easier for people with less strength. This would also allow delivery people to
    walk alongside a PAPC at walking pace. The Canada Regulatory Impact Statement1 mentions a
    'carrying assist feature' that would help a dismounted cyclist to push a power-assisted bicycle and
    that would be deactivated automatically when the rider mounted the bicycle. It is stated that this
    feature is popular in Japan where cyclists consider it invaluable when climbing hills.
    Pedal or throttle activation
    On current PAPCs sold across the world, the two common way of activating the motor are either
    through a mechanism activated by pedalling or through a handle bar twist grip similar to the
    throttle control on motorcycles. The organisation Extra Energy calls these two systems 'pedelecs'
    or 'e-bikes' respectively and both types meet the European definition of a PAPC, detailed in
    Appendix B. The tests conducted since 2001 on a variety of European PAPCs on the website
    www.extranergy.com cover both systems.
    A field test in Canada conducted in 2000 concluded that 'the two e-bike systems - electrically
    propelled and electrically assisted - were equally safe [according to the perception of users during
    a trial]. Therefore, the new regulations [i.e. amendments to the Canadian Motor Vehicle Safety
    Regulations made in 2001] should not include restrictions on the motor's operating apparatus'.2
    They refer to PAPC with twist grip activation as 'electrically propelled' and to a PAPC with pedal
    activation as 'electrically assisted'.
    Requiring a pedal or throttle activation is seen as an unnecessary design restriction with no proven
    road safety benefits, therefore the motor activation mechanism will not be specified in the
    definition, although a condition for its activation could be specified. For example, a throttle control
    can still be used on a PAPC which motor can only provide assistance when the rider is pedalling.
    1 APRIL 2001, Canada Gazette Vol. 135, No. 8.Part II Statutory Instruments 2001 SOR/2001-109 to 129 and SI/2001-44 to 47 Pages
    630 to 689
    Centre d'évaluation du vélo électrique du Québec. (2001) Electric bike 2000 project, prepared for Transport Canada. TP 13732E.
    Power-Assisted Pedal Cycles - Proposal for a new AB vehicle definition
    May 2009 9
    Maximum power output
    Objective: Provide sufficient power assistance to the rider and facilitating free trade without
    compromising safety.
    Existing power limits allowed overseas are evaluated for their relevance in Australia. The existing
    limits, with an indication of the resulting unassisted speed on level ground, are:
    200 watts: This is the current situation in Australia. This definition limits the possibility to
    import overseas products designed to comply with overseas standards that allow higher
    power output limits. No recent documented case showing a direct relation between a
    power assistance of this amplitude and the cause of a serious crash in New South Wales
    has been found.
    Typical unassisted speed: 23.5 km/h.
    250 watts: This is the limit in Europe, and all Japanese models are understood to comply
    with that limit.
    Typical unassisted speed: 25.5 km/h.
    300 watts: This is the limit allowed in New Zealand. No safety analysis has been found to
    justify this level of assistance.
    Typical unassisted speed: 27.5 km/h.
    500 watts: This is the limit allowed in Canada. Transport Canada's Regulatory Impact
    Statement says that '500 watts is a level that well-trained athletes can maintain for a short
    period of time'3. The NSW Centre for Road Safety believes that 500 watts is far beyond a
    sustainable power output for an average cyclist, therefore it would provide PAPCs with a
    level of performance superior to a standard bicycle.
    Typical unassisted speed: 33.0 km/h.
    750 watts: This is the limit allowed in the United States. Canada's Regulatory Impact
    Statement says that '750 watts would not be representative of a cyclist's actual
    performance and could prove dangerous'. The same arguments used for the 500 watt limit
    apply for the 750 watt limit, with the safety risks proportionally greater.
    Typical unassisted speed: 37.6 km/h.
    It is recommended that the maximum allowed power output in Australia be increased to 250
    watts continuous. It is specified that the power output is continuous to regulate the effective
    power, not the peak power in the case of electric motors where the short duration of its effect
    has limited effect on maximum speed. The analysis on the next page shows that this power limit
    maintains the maximum speed within the limits of most unassisted pedal cycles while providing an
    acceptable level of performance uphill compared to unassisted pedal cycles. This level of assistance
    does not require a maximum assisted speed for an average cyclist, however to prevent motor
    assistance at speeds above typical cycling speeds, a maximum assisted speed can be introduced. A
    motor assistance cut-off in function of speed would increase the design complexity of PAPCs,
    however this technology is readily available to accommodate for the European and Japanese
    This is the smallest power increase that allows compatibility with some overseas standards. The
    European market, with 250,000 estimated PAPCs sold in 2007 and Japan, with an estimated
    3 APRIL 2001, Canada Gazette Vol. 135, No. 8.Part II Statutory Instruments 2001 SOR/2001-109 to 129 and SI/2001-44 to 47 Pages
    630 to 689
    Power-Assisted Pedal Cycles - Proposal for a new AB vehicle definition
    May 2009 10
    300,000 PAPCs sold in the same year4, are the two most significant markets outside China for
    PAPCs and a 250 watt power limit would allow the import of PAPCs compliant to both the
    Japanese and European standards. This would open the Australian market to a volume of high
    quality PAPCs designed and manufactured for bigger markets and will facilitate the export of
    locally designed and manufactured products.
    A greater power limit increase will have a lesser impact on the compatibility with overseas
    standards in terms of market size and, in the absence of a maximum assisted speed, will further
    increase the maximum speed of PAPCs therefore potentially increasing safety risks. It is
    considered to be a conservative approach considering that road safety studies for bicycles,
    especially regarding the impact of speed, are limited. Moreover, a 250 watt power limit is still in
    line with the perception that a PAPC is a vehicle with comparable performance to a pedal cycle.
    Analysis of the impact of power output on maximum speed
    For the following analysis, it is assumed that the rider with equipment weights 75 kg and is on a
    20kg PAPC including the battery. A 20 kg PAPC is representative of the lightest models available
    on the market and would allow for faster maximum speeds on hills than a heavier PAPC. The
    equation used to model the maximum speed is the same as the one used in a previous study from
    the Bicycle Industries Australia Ltd (BIA Paper)5. It is:
    P = Crmgv+mgvsin(q)+CwAv3
    P = Power (watt)
    Cr = Coefficient of rolling resistance = 0.005
    m = Mass of rider and machine (kg) = 20 + 75 = 95kg
    g = Gravitational acceleration = 9.81m/s2
    v = Velocity of rider (m/s)
    q = Angle of slope (degree)
    CwA = Product of coefficient of wind resistance and cross-sectional area = 0.6 for a fairly upright
    rider on a mountain bike or hybrid type bicycle, and 0.35 for a rider in racing position on a road
    bicycle. Values were determined with measurements published in the German magazine Radfahren
    on February 19906.
    The 'CwA' coefficient represents a rider in a fairly upright position typical of the majority of PAPCs
    currently sold. Some calculations have been done with a more aerodynamic riding position
    representing a rider lowered on a road bicycle to assess the maximum possible speed.
    For a given slope, travelling speed has been varied to analyse the effect on the required total
    power necessary to travel at constant speed. Power from the rider and/or the auxiliary motor is
    needed to fight three sources of resistance when travelling at constant speed:
    Friction: Crmgv
    Gravity: mgvsin(q)
    Air resistance: CwAv3
    4 Jamerson, Frank E. and Ed Benjamin. Electric Bikes Worldwide Reports, 2008 Update to the 2007 Edition.
    5 Christie, Ian. Bicycle Industries Australia Ltd. Power Assisted Bicycles (PABs). A Comparison of the Theoretical Performance of 200
    Watt and 300 Watt PABs.
    6 http://www.sheldonbrown.com/rinard/aero/measuring.htm
    Power-Assisted Pedal Cycles - Proposal for a new AB vehicle definition
    May 2009 11
    The following figure shows the magnitude of these three sources of resistance for a rider going up
    a hill of 5% gradient in function of speed with two different bicycle weights.
    On a significant incline of 5% gradient, the power needed to overcome gravity far outweighs the
    power needed to fight wind resistance.
    The gradients used in the analysis vary from a flat road up to a very steep 10% gradient, with 2.5%
    increments. As a guide, Bradley's Head road, on Sydney's lower North Shore, has many sections
    between 6 and 7% gradient between Taronga zoo's parking and the ferry wharf. Around the same
    area, the southern approach to the bridge in Cammeray on Miller Street is a very steep section
    with a gradient of 10%. A road with a 10% gradient usually requires the rider to be standing on the
    pedals to climb up the hill. Around Melbourne, the Mountain Highway from The Basin up to
    Sassafras has a steady gradient of 5%.
    Sources of resistance
    75kg rider, 5% incline
    0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45
    Speed [km/h]
    Power [W]
    20 kg
    Power-Assisted Pedal Cycles - Proposal for a new AB vehicle definition
    May 2009 12
    The following figure shows the power needed in function of speed on various inclines.
    Power to achieve various speeds
    75kg rider with 20 kg bicycle
    0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35
    speed [km/h]
    power [w]
    racing position
    Power-Assisted Pedal Cycles - Proposal for a new AB vehicle definition
    May 2009 13
    From the previous chart, it is possible to evaluate the maximum speed for different scenarios:
    Maximum speed in km/h for a given incline
    Upright position
    Flat terrain 2.5%
    Rider only
    21.5 18 11 6.5 4.5 1.5
    Motor only
    28 23.5 17.5 12.5 9 4.5
    Motor only
    30.5 25.5 19.5 14.5 11.5 6.5
    Rider & motor
    (200W motor)
    32.5 27.5 21.5 17 13 8
    Rider & motor
    (250W motor)
    34.5 29 23.5 18.5 15 9.5
    For safety reasons, the maximum speed on a flat terrain with an upright position should be in the
    same range as the speed of a cyclist on an unassisted pedal cycle to avoid increasing risks to
    pedestrians on shared paths and cycle ways as well as to the cyclists themselves in the event of a
    collision with an object or another vehicle travelling in a different direction. The increase of the
    travelling speed for cyclists when travelling in the same direction as faster motorised vehicles on
    the roads is not seen as a safety risk because the speed differential will decrease. Additionally, an
    increase in travelling speed for cyclists going uphill could reduce the safety risk because the
    wobbling that results from travelling at a very low speed would diminish.
    A Monash University study on 1162 cyclists over 5 days across different locations in Melbourne
    found that the 85th percentile speed of cyclists is 32km/h7. The maximum speed with assistance for
    a target user delivering a power output of 100 watts with an upright riding position is lower than
    the measured 85th percentile. Additionally, the extra 50 watts over the currently allowed 200
    watts translates into an extra 2km/h in all conditions that is relatively more significant on hills
    where speeds are lower.
    The effect of limiting motor assistance to a certain travelling speed can be analysed in the following
    way. Knowing that the 85th percentile of cycling speed is 32.5km/h without motor assistance, it
    can be calculated that the power needed to travel at that speed is 300 watts in a "racing" position.
    At 32.5 km/h, the power needed by a tall cyclist riding upright on a hybrid bicycle (the rider used
    in this discussion paper along with a power output of 100 watts) would be 484 watts. This is an
    unlikely power output for the majority of the population. For this reason, combined with the
    reasonable assumption that the cyclists achieving the top 15% of travelling speeds are more likely
    to be on road bicycles in a crouched position, only the 300 watt case will be analysed.
    In the scenario that a cyclist providing 300 watts unassisted on a road bike is given a similar bicycle
    with 250 watt motor (that is not speed limited), the same effort from the cyclist would propel him
    or her at 40.5 km/h. This is a 24.6% increase in speed over 32.5km/h and a 55% increase in kinetic
    energy before considering the increased weight. A 75 kg rider travelling on a PAPC weighting 20
    kg instead of a 10 kg road bicycle would carry a further 11.7% more energy. The increase in speed
    7 Email from Geoff Rose, Director, Institute of Transport Studies, Dept. of Civil Engineering, Monash University. August 15, 2008
    Power-Assisted Pedal Cycles - Proposal for a new AB vehicle definition
    May 2009 14
    and weight would require an additional 15 watts to compensate for the greater friction, but this
    small effect is not considered in this analysis.
    This example shows that an "enthusiast" cyclist riding a "road bike type" PAPC is likely to carry 2/3
    more energy at cruising speed. The road safety risks associated with the increased travelling speed
    and kinetic energy involved are considered unacceptably high. For this reason, a speed limitation
    on the power assistance mechanism is strongly recommended. (See Maximum Assisted Speed page
    The influence of bicycle weight on performance can be estimated from the same equations. During
    a hill climb of 5% gradient using only a 250 watt motor, the difference in climbing speed between a
    cheaper 35kg PAPC with a lead acid battery and a more advanced 20kg bicycle with a lithium-ion
    battery is a little over 1 km/h, or equivalent to having an additional 30 watts available on the
    heavier PAPC.
    Finally, the following exercise estimates the greatest possible improvement in performance caused
    by a new PAPC definition. The estimate is made by comparing a heavier PAPC using a lead acid
    battery with a rated electric motor of 200w with 67% efficiency, an average measure according to
    the BIA Paper that translates into 134 watts of continuous power, and a lighter PAPC with a
    lithium ion battery and 250 watts of continuous power that represents a Japanese or Europeanbuilt
    PAPC. The BIA Paper states that 'the power ratings of electric motors usually refer to the
    electrical power consumed by the motor. The useable power delivered by the motor will be
    lower than the rated power by the efficiency factor of the motor.... Small motors of below 750w
    typically have maximum efficiencies in the range 50% - 80%.'8
    These two scenarios represent the lower end of the market in Australia against the higher end of
    the market in Europe with no significant power assistance from the cyclist. That would represent
    possible gains from a clarification of the definition and an increased competitiveness of the market.
    134 watts
    35kg bike
    250 watts
    20kg bike
    flat 20 25.7
    5% gradient 8 14.8
    10% gradient 4.2 8.8
    The most significant gains in speed are achieved in this extreme example when travelling on a hill
    of 5% gradient and higher.
    Where to measure power
    The common practice in the automotive industry is to refer to the power output measured at the
    engine, not at the wheel. Specifying detailed measurement methods could create confusion,
    especially in the case of a hub motor where the expression 'power measured at the shaft' could
    not apply. It is proposed to include the wording 'combined maximum continuous rated power'.
    8 Christie, Ian. Bicycle Industries Australia Ltd. Power Assisted Bicycles (PABs). A Comparison of the Theoretical Performance of 200
    Watt and 300 Watt PABs.
    Power-Assisted Pedal Cycles - Proposal for a new AB vehicle definition
    May 2009 15
    For enforcement purpose, measuring the power at the wheel is the simplest method as it can be
    applied regardless of the power source and of the vehicle configuration. This methodology
    provides a slight underestimation of the power at the motor because the power losses in the
    drivetrain are not measured. Therefore if rear wheel power exceeds the limit, then the electric
    motor power will also exceed the limit.
    A chassis dynamometer designed to measure the power of motorcycles could be used initially, as
    in an inquiry undertaken in Tasmania9. The same type of dynamometer is available in every State
    and Territory across Australia10.
    Effect of peak power and continuous power on electric motors
    The proposed PAPC definition specifies that the power output is continuous, therefore a PAPC
    equipped with an electric motor of 250 watts continuous power will be able to deliver a greater
    amount of power for a limited time, depending on the characteristics of the motor and of the
    controller. The Canadian manufacturer BionX specifies that its motor with 250 watt continuous
    power output has a 450 watt peak power output, whereas the model with 350 watt continuous
    power has a 700 watt peak power11.
    The overload capacity is the ability of a drive to withstand currents above its continuous rating. It
    is defined by NEMA [National Electrical Manufacturers Association] as 150% of the rated full-load
    current for 'standard industrial Direct Current (DC) motors' for one minute.12
    During a discussion with a local PAPC manufacturer, it was suggested that the maximum current
    output of the controller influences the possible peak power of the motor. In the case of a 36 volt
    battery combined with a 25 Ampere controller, the theoretical peak power of the motor would
    be 900 watts. It was estimated that the system could not sustain this power for more than 10
    The worst case scenario in terms of maximum achievable speed would be that peak power is
    available when the bicycle is already at top speed (on motor only). The extra power would then
    accelerate the PAPC for a given time. Two scenarios were analysed:
    1. 500 watts delivered during one minute. The BionX motors can allow a peak power output of
    around 200% the continuous power output, and it is supposed, based on the NEMA definition,
    that this peak power can be sustained for one minute.
    2. 900 watts delivered during 10 seconds, based on the discussion with the local manufacturer.
    9 TASELEC ELECTRICAL ENGINEERING. Product test report for the Department of Infrastructure Energy and Ressources Tasmania.
    June 2008.
    10 http://www.dyno.com.au/dyno/controller/locator/showDealers
    11 http://www.bionx.ca/en/main/default/45.shtml
    12 http://www.engineersedge.com/motors/motors_definitions.htm
    Power-Assisted Pedal Cycles - Proposal for a new AB vehicle definition
    May 2009 16
    After one minute, the maximum speed of an upright rider would be 30.4km/h and would
    subsequently come down to a slower speed of 25.4 km/h without the extra peak power. A cyclist
    in racing position would, during the same time, go from 30.5km/h to 35.1 km/h, however this case
    is of less interest as it doesn't represent the typical user of a PAPC. Both scenarios using 900
    watts during 10 seconds offer a smaller maximum speed.
    In conclusion, the short speed burst created by a hypothetical peak power available at top speed
    would result in a low acceleration for a limited time, within the 85th percentile speed of a cyclist. In
    the case that a maximum assisted speed is required, the effect of peak power would be contained
    within the limits of the maximum assisted speed.
    Maximum Assisted Speed
    The objective of a maximum assisted speed is to ensure that the power assistance does not
    compromise safety by significantly increasing the speed at which the rider would normally travel
    on level ground without assistance. The previous analysis shows that a 250 watt power limit
    maintains the maximum speed on level ground within the limits of most unassisted pedal cycles.
    This assumption is based on the power output of an average cyclist. Faster cyclists would also
    benefit from motor assistance without a maximum assisted speed, although the relative benefit of
    assistance decreases sharply with an increase in travelling speed. The safest option would be to
    limit motor assistance to a certain speed above which the cyclist is providing all the motive power.
    For this reason it is proposed to require a maximum assisted speed of 25 km/h combined with the
    power restriction to 250 watts.
    Two speeds are mentioned in the major overseas definitions. The European and Japanese
    definitions specify that the motor assistance must stop at 25 km/h and 24 km/h respectively.
    According to the previous power analysis, 233 watts are required to propel a rider with an upright
    position on flat ground at 25km/h, or 93% of the maximum proposed maximum value of 250
    time to accelerate to a given speed
    250W continuous power motor travelling at maximum speed then having 500W or 900W total for a limited time
    0 15 30 45 60 75
    speed [km/h]
    upright 500w
    racing 500w
    uprigth 900w
    racing 900w
    Power-Assisted Pedal Cycles - Proposal for a new AB vehicle definition
    May 2009 17
    watts. The rider could add to this power in order to travel faster, but because power increases
    with a cubic relation to speed, it is believed the majority of the target riders would not travel
    faster than the 85th percentile speed as measured by Monash University.
    The Canadian and American definitions mention a speed of 32km/h. This is not a maximum
    assisted speed, but rather an indication of the speed achievable on motor power only. In Canada,
    the British Columbia Motor Vehicle Act states: 'The motor of a motor assisted cycle must... not
    be capable of propelling the motor assisted cycle at a speed greater than 32km/h on level
    The 32 km/h speed limit, as described by the Canadian and American Regulations, cannot be seen
    as effectively limiting the speed achievable with motor assistance, because at speeds above 32
    km/h, the motor can still assist the rider.
    The Centre d'évaluation du Vélo électrique du Québec (CEVEQ) study found that riders
    perceived no benefit in using an electric bicycle if its propulsion assistance were limited to 23 or
    24 km/h, since this speed is slower than their peak estimated speed of 30km/h, with or without
    assistance. Another reason cited in that study for the increase of the maximum assisted speed to
    32km/h, compared to their initial proposal of 25 km/h, is the harmonisation with the US
    Prescription of the power source
    The proposed definition does not require a particular source of power. The emphasis is on the
    power output and it is not desired to restrict the design options available to manufacturers. The
    most common alternatives are currently electric motors and petrol engines. In Europe, Japan and
    Canada, only electric motors are allowed, so it is foreseen that most of the potential imports from
    Europe and Japan would be propelled by electric motors. There are many concerns regarding
    petrol engines propelling vehicles restricted to a 200 watt power output. These concerns would
    remain valid with a 250 watts power output limit, and the following extract from a Regulatory
    Impact Statement on motorised scooters by the National Transport Committee summarises the
    main issues.
    The benefits of allowing electric motors include less noise, no exhaust emissions (common
    knowledge), a greater ability to identify the power of the motor, the ability to modify the
    output power of the motor without fitting a governor, and generally lower speed capability.
    However, petrol motors produce considerably more noise (and even more with a lesser
    exhaust system), more exhaust emissions (generally increasing with age and use), engine
    governors that are easily removed (anecdotal evidence suggests that in many cases
    instructions are given by the retailer or manufacturer on how to remove the governor) and
    are capable of higher speeds.
    The current motor output power requirement is 200W, and this Regulatory Impact
    Statement recommends that remain. Anecdotal evidence suggests that there are few, if any,
    petrol powered motorised scooters [i.e. foot scooter with a petrol engine attached] on the
    market with an output power under 200W...
    Conversion tools available on the Internet show there are about 15 to 17cc to 1
    horsepower, and 1 horsepower is about 745.7W (see also Commonwealth National
    Measures Regulations 1999, Schedule 11). Using this formula, 200W would be provided by
    roughly 4cc. The lack of precise conversion factors clearly demonstrates the difficulty in
    establishing the output power in watts for petrol motors. This makes compliance
    13 http://www.qp.gov.bc.ca/statreg/reg/m/motorvehicle/151_2002.htm
    14 APRIL 2001, Canada Gazette Vol. 135, No. 8.Part II Statutory Instruments 2001 SOR/2001-109 to 129 and SI/2001-44 to 47 Pages
    630 to 689
    Power-Assisted Pedal Cycles - Proposal for a new AB vehicle definition
    May 2009 18
    unenforceable. In any case, the examples vary from 750 to 2155W, and are indicative of
    most petrol powered motorised scooters available on the market, and well in excess of the
    current 200W requirement.
    A model aeroplane motor at 7.5cc can also be considered for comparison purposes. Using
    the above scenario the aeroplane motor would range from 328 to 374W (in excess of the
    required 200W): model aeroplane motors are much smaller than those fitted to motorised
    Alternatively, petrol powered motors under 200W could be permitted. However, for this
    to work effectively, a regime of testing and certification would need to be developed and
    set in place so that users of these devices can be satisfied that what they are buying meets
    legislative requirements. This regime would also be needed by enforcement agencies so
    that they too can determine whether a particular device meets the requirements. It is
    considered that the cost and logistics of setting up this type of regime (satisfactory to the
    judiciary) would far outweigh any benefits in allowing petrol powered motorised scooters
    to be used on road and road-related areas.15
    It must be emphasised that the comment in the last paragraph on the testing and certification
    applies to electric motor as well.
    In summary, petrol engines, or more generally internal combustion (IC) engines, are noisier than
    electric motors and it is unclear how many, if any, IC engines on the market are generating less
    than 250 watts. On the other hand, mandating a particular power source restricts possible
    innovations where the main objective from a road safety point of view is to limit the power
    output, not the type of power source.
    Identification plate or label
    The objective of a standardised identification is to facilitate enforcement by providing agencies
    with a simple way of determining at the side of the road as to whether a vehicle complies with the
    definition of a PAPC or not.
    To facilitate the enforcement of the PAPC definition, it is proposed to have a durable label affixed
    by the manufacturer in a conspicuous location to certify that the power-assisted pedal cycle
    complies with the relevant ADR definition. This would be simpler and more cost effective than
    requiring the Australian Federal Government to certify every PAPC model entering the country.
    Such a label is similar to the Canadian approach16.
    The labelling requirement would be issued by each Jurisdiction in a consistent way and will not be
    explicitly mentioned in the ADR definition. To ensure consistency across Australia, the
    requirements for an identification plate or adhesive label should be in accordance with the
    Australian Motor Vehicle Certification Board's Circular 0-3-2 'Identification Plates', except from
    the need for an approval number. It is proposed that the durable label refers to an individual
    identification number permanently marked on the frame and the main components of the
    powertrain. Considering the high market value of some PAPC models, permanent identification
    marks would facilitate the retrieval of stolen PAPCs and render their rebirth more difficult.
    Impact Statement. July 2005
    16 http://canadagazette.gc.ca/partII/2001/20010411/html/sor117-e.html
    Power-Assisted Pedal Cycles - Proposal for a new AB vehicle definition
    May 2009 19
    For enforcement purposes, the maximum power output is verifiable with a motorcycle
    dynamometer as explained in the section 'Where to measure power'. A verification that pedalling
    is needed to get assistance from the motor will be sufficient to confirm that a PAPC is a vehicle
    designed to be propelled through a mechanism solely by human power to which is attached one or
    more auxiliary propulsion motors. This will assist with enforcing the provisions consistent with the
    result of the case Matheson v Director of Public Prosecutions17 where a person was identified as
    riding a vehicle deemed not to be a bona fide PAPC based on the fact that this person was
    observed riding the vehicle while not pedalling.
    The use of an identification plate or label as discussed above will assist in the on-road enforcement
    of these provisions.
    Note: penalties against manufacturers or importers who do not comply with the technical
    specifications are not discussed in this Paper.
    17 http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/nsw/supreme_ct/2008/550.html
    Power-Assisted Pedal Cycles - Proposal for a new AB vehicle definition
    May 2009 20
    General notes on safety
    Additional weight of PAPCs
    PAPCs are heavier than similar pedal cycles because of the additional weight of the powertrain and
    energy storage device, usually a combination of battery, controller and electric motor or internal
    combustion engine and a fuel tank. PAPCs weights vary from less than 20 kg for some Japanese
    models up to almost 40 kg for some heavier Australian models.
    To assess the possible impact of the weight difference between PAPCs and pedal cycles, the
    following analysis will consider:
    - A 14 kg 'hybrid' style pedal cycle,18
    - A 21 kg PAPC, typical of the light European models available,19 and
    - A 36 kg PAPC with lead acid battery available in Australia20.
    Considering a 75 kg rider, a 21 kg PAPC represents an increase of 8% in weight compared to the
    same rider on a pedal cycle, whereas a 36 kg PAPC represents an increase of 25%. While pedal
    cycle weights vary between models and types, the weight of the rider will also vary between
    individuals. Data from the Australian Bureau of Statistics' National Health Survey 2004-2005 can
    help estimating this weight variation, based on self reported weights. Below is the weight
    distribution of adult males aged 18 years old and over21.
    It can be argued that the difference between a 'hybrid' type pedal cycle and the lightest PAPCs is
    of similar magnitude to the variation in weight for the adult male population in Australia and that
    the heavier the individual, the smaller the relative impact of the additional weight of the PAPCs.
    Nevertheless, the impact of a heavier PAPC will be assessed in the worst case scenario: a 36 kg
    PAPC compared to a 14 kg bicycle ridden by the same person.
    18 Pedal Cycle Seller website with an extensive list of pedal cycle weights. http://www.thebicycleescape.com/bicycleweights.html
    19 Extra Energy Test Report 2007. www.extraenergy.org
    20 Cruiser Nomad model from the Electric Bicycle Company. http://www.electricbicycle.com.au/cruiser_nomad.html
    21 Australian Bureau of Statistics' National Health survey 2004-2005. http://www.abs.gov.au.
    SELF REPORTED WEIGHT, Weighted estimates - Australia - 2004-05 Adult Males
    Less than 60 60-64 65-69 70-74 75-79 80-84 85-89 90-94 95-99 100 or more Not stated
    Weight [Kg]
    Adult Population [%]
    Power-Assisted Pedal Cycles - Proposal for a new AB vehicle definition
    May 2009 21
    The two main safety impacts of a heavier pedal cycle or PAPC are the increased energy in the case
    of an impact with a vulnerable road user and the increased braking distance.
    Impact with a vulnerable road user
    A heavier PAPC travelling at the same speed as a lighter pedal cycle will carry more energy in the
    case of an impact. The increase in energy is directly proportional to the increase in weight,
    therefore a PAPC and rider combination that is 25% heavier will carry 25% more energy,
    increasing the risk of inducing more damage in the case of a crash. Speed is significantly more
    important in this scenario, where a 25% speed increase with the same weight would result in 56%
    more energy to be dissipated in a crash. The literature review that follows in the next section
    suggests that serious crashes between a pedal cycle rider and another vulnerable road user are
    Increased braking distance
    The comparative braking distance on a pedal cycle can be calculated using the following two
    scenarios. The first scenario is when braking capability is limited by weight transfer lifting the rear
    wheel off the ground, a scenario more common on pedal cycles with a shorter wheelbase and
    powerful brakes. Provided that the rider can apply a greater force on the levers than the one
    necessary to lift the rear wheel off the ground, the additional mass of a PAPC may reduce the
    braking distance compared to a similar pedal cycle because the typical battery and motor locations
    would lower the centre of gravity of the PAPC and rider combination. A lower centre of gravity
    helps preventing rear wheel lift-off that is caused by weight transfer.
    The second scenario is where braking is limited by the force that can be applied on the brakes. It
    can be limited by the hand strength of the rider, or by the design of the brakes that can be found
    on cheaper or older pedal cycle models. This is the worst case scenario where additional weight is
    added on a vehicle which braking system is already reaching its limit. In this case, the braking
    distance is increased proportionally to the weight of the rider and PAPC combination.
    In conclusion, the additional weight of PAPCs, compared to similar pedal cycles, increases the
    energy dissipated in a crash and can increase the braking distance when the braking system is
    limiting the achievable deceleration. Both the energy and the braking distance increase
    proportionally with the total weight of the rider and PAPC. The weight difference between PAPCs
    and pedal cycles can be minimised by using recent technology, especially regarding battery types.
    Lithium-ion batteries offer a significant weight reduction and increased durability compared to
    lead-acid and Nickel Metal Hydride batteries, at a price premium. The use of good quality brakes,
    already widely available on the market, would also minimise the impact of additional weight for
    riders with sufficient hand strength. Weight is a major impediment to performance, usability and
    range, therefore it is reasonable to predict that consumers will prefer lighter models if their prices
    are competitive.
    Power-Assisted Pedal Cycles - Proposal for a new AB vehicle definition
    May 2009 22
    Literature review on bicycle safety
    A consequence of the proposed change to the PAPC definition may be to increase the number of
    cyclists on the roads by allowing a greater variety of products that can provide an increased
    assistance to the cyclist. A literature review has been conducted to better understand the
    circumstances of crashes involving bicycles and the effect of increasing the number of vulnerable
    road users on the roads.
    The Centre for Automotive Safety Research (2008)22 studied bicycle crashes in South Australia.
    The following findings concern pedal cyclist casualties aged 16 and over in the period 2001-2004:
    - 87 per cent of the pedal cycle crashes in the dataset involve a moving motor vehicle. (A
    great number of cyclists who are injured without a motor vehicle being involved do not
    report their crash.)
    - The majority of casualties occur at intersections.
    - 93 per cent of casualties occur on roads where the speed limit is 60 km/h or lower.
    - Crashes termed 'right angle' were the most common. Going straight ahead at the time of
    the right angle collision was the most common movement of both the pedal cycle and the
    motor vehicle.
    - The researcher's interpretation is that there is some real effect (on the probability of the
    injury being serious) of speed of motor vehicle (tending to be slower at intersections) and
    of relative velocity of the motor vehicle and the pedal cycle (tending to be less when they
    are moving in the same direction), but that whether this shows up as statistical significance
    of one or more of the available variables depends on exactly which of these are in the
    Austroads (2006)23 examined the minimisation of conflicts between pedestrians and cyclists on
    shared paths and footpath. Some relevant extracts:
    - A report on Pedestrian and Cyclist Safety from the TravelSafe Committee (1993) states
    that the main cause of fatal bicycle accidents is the collision with motor vehicles. The
    report comments that segregating cyclists from road traffic provides clear safety benefits to
    cyclists. Integration of cyclists with pedestrians may cause an increase in pedestrian/cyclist
    accidents. However, these will be considerably less severe than cyclist/motorist collisions
    which often result in serious injury or death to the cyclist.
    - A study carried out for the UK's Department for Transport by the Transport Research
    Laboratory has shown that crashes occurring in these areas [shared paths] are 'very rare'
    (only one pedestrian/cyclist accident in 15 site years) in the sites studied (Department for
    Transport 1993).
    - Graw & König (2002) produced a report on fatal pedestrian-bicycle collisions which
    investigated the circumstances of such crashes. Again the relative rarity of
    bicycle/pedestrian collisions is stated. Findings included:
    - the cyclist is usually the cause of the crash though the pedestrian suffers the more
    serious injuries
    - cyclists involved in the crashes are usually young persons, whilst seniors are the most
    likely pedestrian victims.
    22 Hutchison et al. Bicycle crashes in South Australia. Centre for Automotive Safety Research. 2008
    23 Austroads. Pedestrian-Cyclist Conflict Minimisation on Shared Paths and Footpaths. AP-R287/06. 2006.
    Power-Assisted Pedal Cycles - Proposal for a new AB vehicle definition
    May 2009 23
    - Stutts, JC & Hunter, WW(1999) carried out a survey of a total of 2558 persons treated for
    injuries incurred while bicycling or walking, at eight hospital emergency departments over a
    one year period in three US states. The results show that only 0.8% of people injured
    occurred in a pedestrian-bicycle collision.
    - Pedestrians have taken issue with speeds at which cyclists travel on shared paths (Road
    Safety Council 1998a and correspondence from the Pedestrian Council). The current
    Australian road standards for design specify that shared paths must be able to
    accommodate the range of speeds at which cyclists travel, recommending that standard
    shared footways should accommodate cyclists travelling at up to 30 km/h, and that where it
    services a high proportion of commuting cyclists it should be up to 50 km/h (McInnes,
    - In the long term, however, widening paths and separating pedestrians and cyclists and
    creating safe on-road alternatives for higher speed cyclists may be the best solutions.
    The Australian Transport Safety Bureau (2006)24 gives an overview of the circumstances of road
    crashes in which cyclists died in the period 1991 to 2005. Findings include:
    - The most common type of crash in which cyclists were fatally injured was the cyclist being
    hit from behind by a motor vehicle travelling in the same lane in the same direction....The
    next most common crash type was the cyclist riding from the footway into an intersection
    or onto a road and being hit by an oncoming motor vehicle.
    - In each of the 5-year periods since 1990, the largest proportions of cyclist deaths have
    occurred on roads where the speed limit was 60 km/h.
    - About 86 per cent of cyclist deaths resulted from a collision between their bicycle and a
    motor vehicle.
    - In the 46 crashes where the cyclist was run over from behind, 10 of the motor vehicle
    drivers failed to observe the cyclist, 5 drivers were under the influence of alcohol or drugs
    and the vision of 5 drivers was obscured for some reason, e.g. glare. For the other crashes,
    the reasons were many and varied or unknown.
    - In over 60 per cent of crashes, the cyclist was deemed to be 'responsible' for the action
    that precipitated the fatal crash. This was particularly the case in crashes at intersections
    where the cyclist was either riding through the intersection on the road or moving from
    the footway onto the intersection.
    The Regulatory Impact Statement done in Canada regarding the introduction of a power-assisted
    pedal cycle definition states that cyclists felt safer with a PAPC than a conventional bicycle because
    they had more power from standing start and were more likely to obey stop signs as the vehicle is
    easier to start again.
    24 Deaths of cyclists due to road crashes. ATSB ROAD SAFETY REPORT. July 2006
    Power-Assisted Pedal Cycles - Proposal for a new AB vehicle definition
    May 2009 24
    A study conducted in Oregon25, in the United States, found that crash rate for cyclists decreased
    with an increase in the number of cyclists. The number of cyclists in a particular area was
    monitored along with cycling crashes. The increase in cycling was partially due to an improvement
    in the quality of the infrastructure. The following table shows the improvement in pedal cycle
    crash rate.
    Decrease in Pedal Cycle Crash Rate
    Jacobsen (2003)26 found that:
    - The likelihood that a given person walking or bicycling will be struck by a motorist varies
    inversely with the amount of walking or bicycling overall. This pattern is consistent across
    communities of varying size, from specific intersections to cities and countries, and across
    time periods.
    - A motorist is less likely to collide with a person walking and bicycling if more people walk
    or bicycle. Policies that increase the numbers of people walking and bicycling appear to be
    an effective route to improving the safety of people walking and bicycling.
    25 Source: Birk M., Geller R., 2007 On-Street Bikeways and Off-Street Trails: An Integrated Approach: Overview, State of Oregon,
    United States.
    26 Jacobsen P.L., 2003 Safety in numbers: more walkers and bicyclists, safer walking and bicycling, Injury Prevention, Vol. 9, p. 205 -
    Power-Assisted Pedal Cycles - Proposal for a new AB vehicle definition
    May 2009 25
    Robinson (2005)27 verified if Australian data followed the same rule showed by overseas research
    where fatality and injury risks per cyclist and pedestrian are lower when there are more cyclists
    and pedestrians. It was found that as with overseas data, the exponential growth rule fits
    Australian data well. If cycling doubles, the risk per kilometre falls by about 34%; conversely, if
    cycling halves, the risk per kilometre will be about 52% higher.
    Litman and Fitzroy (2005)28 found that as non-motorised travel increases in a community, both
    total per capita traffic casualty rates and per-mile pedestrian and cyclist crash rates tend to decline.
    ...In summary, although non-motorised travel is more hazardous to users per mile of travel, for
    various reasons increased non-motorised travel tends to reduce total traffic risk in a community.
    Greater London Authority (2007)29 states that Transport for London is making real progress
    improving safety for cyclists. Against an increase of 83 per cent in cycling since 2000, the number
    of cyclists killed or seriously injured on London's roads has fallen by 28 per cent compared with
    the Government's baseline figures from the mid to late 1990s.
    Relevance to PAPC
    Firstly, the most common type of serious bicycle crash involves motor vehicles, where the two
    most common types are collisions at intersections and bicycles being hit from behind while
    travelling in the same direction. It may be suggested that an increase speed capability of PAPC on
    hills may reduce the speed differential between motor vehicles and bicycles therefore reducing the
    severity of crashes where cyclists are hit from behind. However, the factors for these crashes
    cited in ATSB (2006) (failed to observe the cyclist, influence of alcohol or drugs and the driver's
    vision obscured) do not lead to the assumption that the likelihood of such crashes would decrease
    with a decrease in speed differential between motor vehicles and cyclists.
    Secondly, a variety of sources present crashes between cyclists and pedestrians as a 'rare
    occurrence', which is supported by crash data from NSW: an analysis of pedestrian crashes in
    NSW between 1997 and 2007 reveals that 3 pedestrians were killed and another 334 were injured
    following a collision involving a cyclist but no motor vehicle, which represents 0.29% of
    pedestrians killed and 1.16% of pedestrians injured in all crashes during the same period. While
    cyclist speed is a concern for pedestrians sharing their path with cyclists, the analysis summarised
    in this document shows that the maximum cycling speed on a flat terrain is not affected
    significantly, therefore the impact on both perceived and real safety for pedestrians should be
    Thirdly, a potential increase in the number of cyclists due in part to an increase in product variety
    and assistance capability could lead to a reduction of crash rates for bicycles. It must be mentioned
    that some studies supporting this claim saw an increase in cycling following significant investments
    in cycling facilities. Without a comparable improvement in cycling facilities across Australia, it is
    uncertain if the potential increase in cycling and related crash rate reduction will occur.
    27 Robinson, Dorothy L. Safety in numbers in Australia: more walkers and bicyclists, safer walking and bicycling. Health Promotion Journal
    of Australia 2005:16, pp.47-51
    28 Litman T., Fitzroy S., 2005 Safe Travels: Evaluating Mobility Management Traffic Safety Impacts, Victoria Transport Policy Institute,
    Victoria, Canada. http://www.vtpi.org/safetrav.pdf
    29 Greater London Authority, 2007 The Mayor announces huge rise in cycling in London, Media Release, 1st May.
    Power-Assisted Pedal Cycles - Proposal for a new AB vehicle definition
    May 2009 26
    Transition to new definition and treatment of existing power-assisted
    pedal cycles
    The proposed definition would necessitate all new PAPCs to comply with a revised 'Vehicle
    Standard (Australian Design Rule - Definitions and Vehicle Categories)' from the implementation
    date. It should not be necessary to undertake a Regulatory Impact Statement regarding the
    increase in power output as this is a relaxation of the current situation. Similarly, the need to
    pedal in order to obtain motor assistance is in line with the concept that the motor is auxiliary and
    human power is the main power source. The maximum assisted speed may be perceived as an
    additional restriction compared to the current situation and this issue would need to be discussed
    further. Once an agreement is reached and a timeframe is established for the modification of the
    ADR definition, the bicycle industry should be informed in a timely manner to allow for the
    manufacturing or import of products compliant to the new definition.
    The labelling requirements would be implemented at a jurisdictional level in a consistent manner,
    allowing for a parallel implementation to the ADR definition change process. Current products are
    not required to be labelled, so an enforcement strategy for such PAPCs excluded by the labelling
    requirement would have to be developed.
    Proposed next steps
    The comments of the various stakeholders will be collected and collated by the NSW Centre for
    Road Safety. A workshop will then be held to seek an agreement on the replacement of the
    current PAPC definition featured in the ADRs. An agreement on the labelling scheme and its
    implementation is also desirable and will be discussed at the same workshop.
    Power-Assisted Pedal Cycles - Proposal for a new AB vehicle definition
    May 2009 27
    Appendix B - Overseas requirements
    Table 1. Summary of PAPC requirements around the world
    Country Need to pedal
    to be motorassisted
    power output
    before cut-off
    assisted speed*
    Australia NO 200 NO none
    New Zealand NO 300 NO none
    Europe YES 250 YES 25
    Japan YES 250** YES 24
    Canada NO*** 500 NO none
    USA NO 750 NO none
    *From this speed the motor does not help propelling the pedal cycle and the rider must provide all the power.
    **According to Parker (2006)30, although the Japanese standard does not specify a maximum power output, none of
    the 47 Japanese models available in 2006 were over 250 watts. The Japanese definition of a PAPC, described in the
    following pages, is based on the input torque from the rider and the vehicle speed.
    ***Minimum speed to obtain assistance is 3km/h if no on/off switch is available
    A sample of PAPC models built to the specifications described above is available in Appendix D.
    New Zealand - Extract from the New Zealand Land Transport website
    A Gazette notice was issued on 2 February 2006 by the Director of Land Transport declaring
    power-assisted pedal cycles powered by a motor with a maximum power output not exceeding
    300 watts not to be motor vehicles. 31
    European Union - Extract from the European Commission website
    Cycles with pedal assistance which are equipped with an auxiliary electric motor having a
    maximum continuous rated power of 0.25 kW [250 watts], of which the output is progressively
    reduced and finally cut off as the vehicle reaches a speed of 25 km/h, or sooner, if the cyclist stops
    The European Union (EU) Directive 2002/24/EC came into effect on May 9, 2003 and replaced the
    Directive 92/61/EEC.
    After May 9, 2003, the EU Member States had the choice of either keeping their current
    regulations for another 6 months or changing over to the EU-directive. Since November 9, 2003
    all Members of the EU are required to integrate this Directive into their national legislation and
    abolish their previous regulations.33
    30 Parker, A.A. (2006). Electric Power-Assisted Bicycles Reduce Oil Dependence and Enhance the Mobility of the Elderly. 29th
    Australian Transport Research Forum
    31 http://www.landtransport.govt.nz/importing/notice-low-powered-vehicles.html
    32 2002-24-EC type-approval of two or three-wheel motor vehicles 18 March 2002
    Power-Assisted Pedal Cycles - Proposal for a new AB vehicle definition
    May 2009 28
    Implementation of a new PAPC standard in Europe including magnetic
    The new European standard EN 15194 for EPACs (Electrically Power Assisted Cycles) is far more
    complicated than the European Committee for Standardisation (CEN) standards currently in force
    for conventional bicycles. This standard is expected to be published on 30 April 2009.
    The CEN Technical Committee TC333, with representatives from the bike industry and headed
    by Chairman Siegfried Neuberger from the German industry association Zweirad-Industrie-
    Verband (ZIV), expects the safety standard to be published in April 2009, along with an annex
    detailing Electro Magnetic Compatibility (EMC) requirements. These EMC requirements
    contribute significantly to the complicated and costly new safety standards for electric bicycles.
    EMC requirements are already applied throughout Europe to all kinds of electric appliances and
    vehicles like cars, motorcycles and mopeds. EMC requirements are designed to, for instance,
    ensure the safety of people who use a pacemaker or hearing-aid when driving cars or e-Bikes.
    Once vehicles that use electronics have passed EMC testing they obtain a European conformity
    mark (CE mark). According to the publication Bike Europe, all the e-Bikes (pedelecs) that are
    currently on the market meet the EMC requirements already in force throughout Europe.
    Pedelecs that are to comply with the new EN 15194 EPAC safety standard will have to be tested
    in the same way as cars, motorcycles or mopeds. That means that, as TC333 chairman Siegfried
    Neuberger points out: 'Complete bikes and/or electronic/electrical subassemblies will have to be
    The current regulation specifies components for power-assisted bicycles including a maximum of
    three wheels, one or more electric motors that can assist the cyclist up to a speed of 32 km/h and
    that do not exceed a total output of 500 watts, and an on/off switch or mechanism that prevents
    the motor from being engaged until the bicycle reaches a speed of three km/h.
    Power-assisted bicycles must also comply with the requirements of provincial and territorial
    regulations. Each province or territory may adopt the federal definition as is or add further
    restrictions to meet their own specific needs.35
    The Canadian approach towards PAPCs seems different in some aspects to the proposal
    elaborated in this document. The Insurance Corporation of British Columbia, a Canadian Crown
    Corporation responsible for licensing and insurance at a provincial level, provides examples of
    vehicles that they consider as power-assisted bicycles. In the following illustration found on their
    website, the red vehicle looks similar to heavy mopeds with pedals with an excessive width
    between pedals that do not allow them to be propelled by human power for any length of time,
    therefore rendering the motor as the main source of power.
    34 http://www.bike-eu.com/news/3086/big-changes-ahead-for-european-e-bike-market.html
    35 http://www.tc.gc.ca/mediaroom/backgrounders/b01-R050.htm
    Power-Assisted Pedal Cycles - Proposal for a new AB vehicle definition
    May 2009 29
    What is a Motor-assisted cycle (MAC)?
    A MAC is a two-or three- wheeled cycle with a seat,
    pedals and an electric motor that is 500 watts or less.
    MACs cannot be gas-powered.
    MACs can range widely in appearance: from a bicycle
    with a small-sized motor to a scooter with bike
    pedals. 36
    While the Canadian approach is still useful as a reference, further examples from their decision
    making process should be taken with the consideration that their conclusion differs from what is
    suggested through this document.
    USA - Extract from Public Law
    The term 'low-speed electric bicycle' means a two- or three-wheeled vehicle with fully operable
    pedals and an electric motor of less than 750 watts (1 h.p.), whose maximum speed on a paved level
    surface, when powered solely by such a motor while ridden by an operator who weighs 170 pounds [77.3
    kg], is less than 20 mph [32 km/h].37
    36 http://www.icbc.com/registration/reg_rules_low_pwr_mtr_asstd_cycles.asp
    37 116 STAT. 2776 PUBLIC LAW 107-319-DEC. 4, 2002
    Power-Assisted Pedal Cycles - Proposal for a new AB vehicle definition
    May 2009 30
    Japan - Based on an extract from a conference on bicycles in Taipei
    Rule 3, Article 1, the Implementation Rules for the Road Traffic Law (the Prime Minister's Office Order)
    Standards established in the Prime Minister's Office Order of 2, No. 11, Item 1, Article 2, Standard Law of
    Bicycles Using Power Sources to Assist Human Energy is described as follows:
    1. Power sources used for assisting human energy are those that match all of the following
    A. Are Motors.
    B. At speeds below 24km/h, power sources provide assistance to human energy at a rate
    'X' that follows the rules described below:
    (1) Speed below 15km/h
    X = 100% of human energy
    (2) Speed over 15km/h and below 24km/h
    X = (1- [speed (km/h) - 15] / 9)% of human energy
    C. Power sources do not provide any assistance at speed over 24km/h.
    D. Power sources compliant with requirements A to C are designed to prevent any easy
    modification rendering them non-compliant with any of these requirements.
    2. The operation of power sources assisting human energy is smooth, reliable and does not create
    any hindrance to the user.
    Relation between Assist Rate and Speed
    Rule 3, Article 1, the Implementation Rules for the Road Traffic Law (Prime Minister's Office Order) B and
    C of Standard 1 for bicycles that use prime movers to assist human energy (hereinafter referred to as
    'assist rate')...:
    1) At speeds below 15km/h, the assist rate is below 1:1.
    2) At speeds over 15km/h and below 24km/h, the assist rate reduces with an increase of speed down to nil
    at speed over 24km/h.38
    Japan - Amendment to the definition to allow higher assistance on hills at low
    A Cabinet Office regulation enforced on December 1, 2008 that revises the drive assist ratio for the motor
    drive-assisted bicycles that is provided in the road traffic law enforcement regulations.
    The ratio of motor power to human power (assist ratio) will become 1:2 at speeds of less than 10 km/h.39
    38 April 1, 2001. Masatoku Kokayu, Officer, PAS Business Department, Yamaha Motor Co., Ltd. Regulations on Electric Bicycles in
    Japan. Conference of Safety Popularisation for Electric Assist Bicycles
    39 http://www.eneloop.info/fileadmin/EDITORS/Portal/PRESS_RELEASES/1201_SANYO_eneloop_bikeNR.pdf
    Power-Assisted Pedal Cycles - Proposal for a new AB vehicle definition
    May 2009 31
    Appendix C - Example of power-assisted pedal cycles conforming to
    various legislation
    Model Photo Price40
    Australia Currie I-Zip
    $2,395 22 200 NiMH
    Ezee Hi-
    Torq II
    speed bike
    $2,528 25.6 300 NiMH
    $2,007 ~18-20 250 Li-ion
    Kalkhoff Pro
    $3,125 23.2 250 Li-ion
    Canada Heinzmann
    Comfort 26
    $3,261 25 500 NiMH
    USA Optibike
    $9,339 21.8 800 Li-ion
    40 Prices as of June 2008. Shipping cost not included. Some models would need to be sourced overseas.
    Last edited by a moderator: Dec 18, 2015
  9. Irish John

    Irish John Guest

    Hey guys, when you read that bit about needing to regulate a max allowable width for a crank it really tells you that these regulatory proposals are only about being punitive. The sole purpose here is to get motored bikes off the roads and the crank width proposal is a nasty little attempt to clobber the 4-stroke frame mounts because they need the wide cranks. I think it is obvious that the motive throughout this report is really quite venal.
    This is one of the areas to pick out as a weak point because it reinforces perceptions about the RTA's real purpose and motive when their reputation is already lower than whale excrement amongst the general public.
    You have to hit these guys with a heavy hammer where it hurts them most - their reputation for being nasty and ignoring public opposition etc.
    The motive behind this report is to close what they see as a loophole in the law that allows disqualified drivers to keep their jobs by travelling to work on a motored bike. That's what galls these guys! They hate the thought of guys in the bush being spared the additional punishment of losing their livlihoods as well as their license. Any NSW Labour politician has a glass jaw simply because of their terrible reputation so we need to hit them with well aimed blows showing just how out of touch with environmental sustainability and carbon emissions they really are. The lady cyclist killed on the Pacific Hwy last week, right where I live and whom I knew, was killed on a road built for the RTA by Halliburtons (The US War Mongerers) in 2002 and they omitted the hard shoulder on the bridges to save costs. She was hit from behind by a truck on the bit where the hard shoulder cycleway runs out on that bridge. (see attached picture showing exact spot) The hard shoulder is a dedicated cycleway on this new Pacific Highway and the place where she died was a chicane offering no protection to riders because Halliburtons wanted to save on bridge width. It was negligence and incompetence that allowed the RTA to accept the cost saving and it was an accident spot waiting to happen. I reckon we need to show how utterly incompetent the RTA are and how unfit they are to be making any guidelines whatsoever concerning bicycles when only 6 years ago they allowed that bridge to be built. Lets be frank the RTA these days couldn't organise a shag in a brothel. Look at how the Feds ignored funding their proposals in last weeks budget because they were deemed to be incompetently presented without any real thought behind them. Liberal govts got more than NSW labour. These guys are poison and they know it and they know they are being cut loose by Federal Labour to drift into an oblivion of their own making. We need to reinforce somehow the perception of their utter incompetence so they feel the shame that they so richly deserve. They are as much "on the nose" right now as the Cronulla Sharks and the RSL so we need to focus on striking their nose!

    Attached Files:

    Last edited by a moderator: May 24, 2009
  10. Sorry I didn't read the entire thing but the part about maximum speed is cool with me because the $%^%$# that pass you going faster than 20 mph just inches from your body are the $%^#@$ that's ruining it for all of us.
    I will never stop advocating that these bikes should not run faster than 20 mph. Sorry but that's my stance.
    To fulfill your need for speed get a motorcycle with DOT approved wide tires and great brakes to stop you from high speeds bla bla bla.
    Bicycles with little engines are here because people not in the greatest of shape needs a little help.
    So going 15 mph on a bicycle should be the common norm around here.
    Leave your house earlier if you commute. Your sheer FUN of smelling the air LONGER on a commute is GREAT for your health.
    Clipping along trying to maintain speeds with cars now how in the world is this good for your health?
    Right there what Irish John posted RIGHT THERE just above me should be telling all of us that we have to stay to the right when we are on the roads.
    Because that's what we are.
    People that want to make us extinct are those that see the few that treat their MB's like a motorcycle. Too fast for pedestrian traffic,too slow for even scooter traffic.
    I'm cool with slowing way down if it means our survival.
  11. Irish John

    Irish John Guest

    Don't forget Large that we ride on the left down here. The lady killed was riding as far to the left as was possible but at this point she had no hard shoulder to cycle in. On this road shown in the picture above a speed of about 30mph is actually about right. Serious cyclists on push bikes pass me at 40 mph on their Bianchi carbon racers. But I basically agree with you except these regs are stipulating a max speed limit of 15 mph (25 kmh) and that is quite frankly too ridiculous for words.
    Great to see you back after so long not seeing you Large.
  12. heathyoung

    heathyoung Member

    I've already hacked away at the PDF with points that are wrong or a problem in the other thread in General Discussions...
  13. BoltsMissing

    BoltsMissing Active Member

    aha !
    I get " unauthorized entry" when clicking for a document link
    for product safety standard EN 15194

    A new European product safety standard EN 15194 will be published in 2009. EN 15194 contains several new requirements for ebikes to be sold in European Union and European Economic Area, including weight and voltage limitations. EN 15194 also defines a specific name for EU approved electrically-assisted cycles, EPAC - "Electrically Pedal Assisted Cycle".
  14. CalgarysFool

    CalgarysFool Member

    Just a suggestion, but far away, and tucked underneath and out of sight as Australia is, we may all do well to take note. It's much easier to jump on the bandwagon than take the initiative, and other countries may use the Australian document as a framework for similar actions.

    The more grief inflicted on the Australian initiative, the better for the rest of us, as well.


  15. wanderer33

    wanderer33 New Member


    Hi bolts missing.
    Just recently, I was wondering, why there isn't practically
    any posts, except UK occasionaly, from EU on this site and since you've mentioned EU and electric bikes, are MBs allowed on the Continent?

    QUOTE=BoltsMissing;208520]aha !
    I get " unauthorized entry" when clicking for a document link
    for product safety standard EN 15194

    A new European product safety standard EN 15194 will be published in 2009. EN 15194 contains several new requirements for ebikes to be sold in European Union and European Economic Area, including weight and voltage limitations. EN 15194 also defines a specific name for EU approved electrically-assisted cycles, EPAC - "Electrically Pedal Assisted Cycle".[/QUOTE]
  16. BoltsMissing

    BoltsMissing Active Member


    We found out about the document and pending EN proposals by doing a Google.

    I am not aware of the cultre and the people's general perception of a motored bike if in much favour or not in Europe etc. because I have not been there lately to do an "official survey"

    So if anyone can obtain a copy of that document would they be so kind and post it here please.
  17. oktobr

    oktobr New Member

    I think one of the greater arguements to this legislation would be that banning MBs will be counterproductive to the development and use of sustainable and ecologically sound transport. Taking into account the environmental damage and ever increasing use of fossil fuels by a population that is still becoming more and more reliant on cars as everyday transport, moving away from public transport and bicycles/MBs, it is irresposible for the RTA to legislate against MBs.
  18. I should think safety in getting across a busy intersection would be an issue. Moderate power shouldn't be a sin. They shouldn't be screwing around with motor -assisted transpo anyhow what with the coming world-wide recession coming. I was actually thinking of immigrating to Oz to escape the Obama socialized state. Dunno now. Sounds sorta unstable.
  19. ZnsaneRyder

    ZnsaneRyder Member

    They just want to limit us on our bikes to try to control us, and to keep us dependent on their system, and paying the high gas prices, but slowly forcing more and more folks to use cars, or walk.

    That's what THEY want. IF there is a recession coming, they sure don't want folks making it easier by riding motorized bicycles.

    Motorized Bicycles is a way to have our freedoms of choice.
  20. machiasmort

    machiasmort Active Member

    Saddle up your ROO's

    "the green way to get arround"!