Search Results
 

Train Accident Reconstruction Railroad, Train, and Railcar Crash Analysis Veritech engineers have substantial experience with the reconstruction of railroad crossing (otherwise known as “level crossing”) accidents involving vehicles and pedestrians. Our engineers provide detailed analyses of: ​ Train Event Data Recorder (EDR) data reports Speed calculations Physical evidence evaluations Line-of-sight and visibility issues Accident sequence time-space relationships Technical analysis of video and audio transmission records ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ Veritech engineers have experience working with a team of additional experts in a train accident evaluation and can provide your train-handling, civil engineering and biomechanical engineering experts with the technical information they need in forming their opinions. ​ ​ Train Event Data Recorder and Black Box Data Reports Trains are often equipped with the ability to log data as they are moving. These event recorders, while similar to event recorders (also known as black boxes) found on automobiles and large trucks , have a few differences that make them unique to locomotive operations. Items such as the following are typically recorded every second for a minute or more before the point of locomotive stop: ​ Time and Date Distance Traveled (based on drive wheel diameter) Speed Horn sounding (at 10 samples per second) Electronic Air Brake (EAB) activation Electronic Air Brake – Emergency Brake activation (if activated by engineer) Throttle level Bell activation ​ These items aid in determining the events surrounding an incident with a train. Typically, due to the mass of a train, there may only be minimal deceleration due to impact with a pedestrian, vehicle, or even a semi tractor-trailer. Because of this, a drop in train speed may not be recorded by the train’s event data recorder, or may not be readily identifiable in the data. Therefore, other methods to determine point of impact must be used when reconstructing the accident. ​ ​ Sometimes, information on the train’s point of rest can be used to calculate the location, speed, and position of the train at the point of impact. This type of information may rely on proper record of the train at its point of rest, which can be very far from the point of impact. Trains can take a mile of distance to come to rest if traveling at highway speeds. Photogrammetry of a train’s point of rest and analysis of the train’s event data recorder can help determine events such as point of impact and impact speed. ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ Train Mounted Video Analysis Front facing video cameras found in locomotives are common in today’s trains. This is because these video cameras can record incidents that occur during a train’s movement, and in many cases can help identify the cause of an accident. One such system is made by General Electric, named the LocoCAM. This camera system, and others similar to it, can record the view out of the front of the train along with audio recording capability. Veritech has analyzed rail way impacts based upon the recordings from these videos. Scientific processes such as photogrammetry and videogrammetry are used by Veritech to extract data about the impact such as speeds, time and space relationships, and visibility issues. Please contact one of our licensed professional engineers at 303-660-4395 to discuss your case and receive a free initial consultation with honest and candid comments. Mark Kittel, P.E., D.F.E Principal Engineer Joe Tremblay, P.E., D.F.E. Principal Engineer

Publication White Paper: Extracting Physical Evidence from Digital Photographs for use in Forensic Accident Reconstruction David Danaher, P.E., Jeff Ball, Ph.D., P.E., and Mark Kittel, P.E., D.F.E. Typically accident scene investigators or law enforcement officers will document evidence which they consider to be “significant events ”, such as the beginning of a tire mark, the first gouge mark or the rest position of the vehicles. Although this information gives the forensic engineer a snap shot of the events during the accident, it may not give the detail required to do a thorough analysis. The evidence and information located between the major events can provide further details as to the speed and dynamic motion of the accident vehicles that may be necessary for a complete analysis. To determine the position of the vehicle between the points documented by law enforcement, a forensic engineer can often use the photographs taken at an accident scene which show the physical evidence such as the tire marks or roadway gouges. To determine the location of the physical evidence depicted in the accident scene photographs several methods can be used such as camera matching, photogrammetry , and photo rectification. In order to accurately place the evidence, basic dimensions of the roadway and surroundings should be determined from measurements taken by the officers at the scene or by subsequent inspection. To determine the exact roadway or median geometry, a laser survey can be utilized by either a forensic engineer familiar with the equipment or an independent surveying company. Once the available data is collected, camera matching, photogrammetry, or rectification can be performed. The following demonstrates each of those three processes. Camera Matching Camera matching involves the use of the accident scene photographs depicting various points of evidence at the scene of the accident. Camera matching begins with a close review of the available photographs to determine the extents of the accident site which must be surveyed. The next step is to perform an accurate 3-dimensional survey of the accident site to document reference features which are depicted in the photographs. The survey data is then used to create a three dimensional model of the roadway surface using CAD software. The survey data is then combined with the accident scene photographs, both of which are imported into a three dimensional software package, such as 3D Studio Max. Using camera matching techniques, a virtual camera can be positioned relative to the 3D roadway surface with the same specifications and orientation as the camera used by the investigator. Once the camera is properly positioned, the physical evidence can then be mapped from the photograph onto the 3D roadway. Data obtained in this manner can then be used in the creation of a two or three dimensional accident scene drawing . Photogrammetry Another method of documenting physical evidence is through the use of photogrammetry. Photogrammetry is a technique that determines the three-dimensional geometry of object on the accident scene from two dimensional photographs. The three dimensional coordinates of the objects in the photographs are determined after the virtual camera is positioned in the virtual space. With the virtual camera properly positioned, the specifications of the camera and the vanishing point in the photographs can be determined. In some cases, the only evidence available may be photographs. Even though the vehicles or tire marks may no longer be available, the photographs can be used to extract “lost” evidence. For example, a vehicle involved in a rollover may have been crushed or salvaged years before the engineer’s involvement, but the deformation to the vehicle is still crucial to the investigation. To evaluate the damage, photogrammetry can be used on the available photographs to quantify the extent of the damage. With sufficient photographs taken from several positions around the vehicle and knowing certain dimensions of the vehicle, such as the wheel base, a scaled three dimensional model of the crushed vehicle can be produced. Photographs from several viewpoints can be imported into software such as PhotoModeler and then the forensic engineer can select points common in each photograph. After the common points are selected on the photographs and the camera specifications are entered into PhotoModeler, then the software, which is based on known principles of optics and photogrammetry, can calculate the location of each selected point in a three dimensional coordinate system. The data can then be exported to a 3D software program to create an accurate scaled model of the damaged vehicle. The forensic engineer can then use the model of the crushed vehicle to aid in determining vehicle positions, speeds, and intrusion into the occupant compartment , as a result of the roll sequence. Photographic Rectification Photographic rectification is another tool the forensic engineers have at their disposal to analyze physical evidence that may not have been measured by the investigating officer. Two dimensional (2D) rectification is the process of transforming a single photograph which is oblique to a planar surface into an orthographic image or a top-down view . This simplified form of photogrammetry is applicable only to photographs in which evidence is located on a relatively flat, planar surface such as a roadway (a typical occurrence in vehicle accident investigation). A computer program such as PC-Rect can be used to import and rectify a digital photograph or digital scan of a photograph. The process involves the forensic engineer defining and locating known roadway dimensions in the photograph, such as lane line spacing, lane widths, etc. The program uses these dimensions to calculate the position, orientation, and specifications of the camera. If some or all of the information about the position of the camera or specifications are known to the engineer, the data can be entered into the software for increased accuracy. The rectification process itself can be visualized as the reverse of the photographic process. When the photograph is taken, photons of light are projected from the road surface, through the camera lens and onto the image plane (the film). For the 2D rectification, it is assumed that the point on the road, the focal point of the camera and the point on the image plane are collinear. To rectify the photograph, the “light” is projected from the camera position (the focal point), through the image plane (the photograph, located a distance of the lens focal length times the image magnification factor from the focal point) and onto a planar surface. The resulting bitmap image has the appearance of taking the photograph and stretching it onto the roadway. With the proper definition of the area to be rectified and good reference dimensions in the photograph, high accuracy can be achieved, resulting in scale images in which measurements of evidence important to the accident investigation can be taken. Conclusion Overlooked or undocumented evidence can be retrieved and quantified as long as photographs of such evidence are available. Using photographs of the accident scene or of the vehicle, “lost” evidence can be accurately determined using several scientifically based methods, such as camera matching, photogrammetry, and rectification. The accuracy of the photogrammetry methods are a function of the quality of the photographs, the available dimensional data, and skills of the forensic engineer. The more information available, documented, and collected by the forensic engineer, the greater the potential accuracy of the analysis. The available techniques to retrieve the evidence such as camera matching, photogrammetry, and rectification are well-accepted and published scientific methods and have been accepted by State and Federal courts and have successfully passed Daubert challenges. References Massa, David J. “Using Computer Reverse Projection Photogrammetry to Analyze an Animation.” Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE) paper 1999-01-0093 (1999). Cliff, William E., Duane D. MacInnis, and David A. Switzer. “An Evaluation of Rectified Bitmap 2D Photogrammetry with PC-Rect.” Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE) paper 970952 (1997). Neale, William, T.C., Steve Fenton, Scott McFadden and Nathan A. Rose. “A Video Tracking Technique to Survey Roadways for Accident Reconstruction.” Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE) paper 2004-01-1221 (2004). Fenton, Stephen, and Richard Kerr. “Accident Scene Diagramming Using New Photogrammetric Technique.” Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE) paper 970944 (1997). Grimes, Wesley D. “Computer Animation Techniques for Use in Collision Reconstruction.” Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE) paper 920755 (1992). Campbell, A. T. III and Richard L. Friedrich. “Adapting Three-Dimensional Animation Software for Photogrammetry Calculations.” Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE) paper 930904 (1993). Grimes, Wesley D. “Classifying the Elements in a Scientific Animation.” Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE) paper 940919 (1994). Grimes, Wesley D., Charles P Dickerson and Corbett D. Smith. “Documenting Scientific Visualizations and Computer Animations Used in Collision Reconstruction Presentations.” Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE) paper 980018 (1998). Bohan, Thomas L. and April A. Yergin. ‘Computer-Generated Trial Exhibits: A Post-Daubert Update. Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE) paper 1999-01-0101. (1999). Pepe, Michael D., James S. Sobek, D. Allen Zimmerman. “Accuracy of Three-Dimensional Photogrammetry as Established by Controlled Field Tests.” Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE) paper 930662. (1993). Tumbas, Nicholas S., J. Rolly Kinney, and Gregory C. Smith. “Photogrammetry and Accident Reconstruction: Experimental Results.” Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE) paper 940925 (1994). Rentschler, Walter and Volker Uffenkamp. “Digital Photogrammetry in Analysis of Crash Tests.” Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE) paper 1999-01-0081 (1999). Smith, Gregory C., and Douglas L. Allsop. “A Case Comparison of Single-Image Photogrammetry Methods.” Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE) paper 890737 (1989). Switzer, David A. and Trevor M. Candrlic. “Factors Affecting the Accuracy of Nonmetric Analytical 3-D Photogrammetry Using Photomodeler.” Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE) paper 1999-01-0451 (1999). Pepe, Michael D., James S. SObek and Gary J. Huett. “Three-dimensional Computerized Photogrammetry and its Application to Accident Reconstruction.” Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE) paper 890739 (1989). Pepe, Michael D., Eric Grayson and Andrew McClary. “Digital Rectification of Reconstruction Photographs.” Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE) paper 961049 (1996). Kullgren, A., A Lie, and C. Tingvall. “The Use of Photogrammetry and Video Films in the Evaluation of Passenger Compartment Measurement and Occupant-Vehicle Contacts.” Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE) paper 950239 (1995). Main, Bruce W., Eric A. Knopf. “A New Application of Camera Reverse Projection in Reconstructing Old Accidents.” Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE) paper 950357 (1995). Wester-Ebbinghaus, Wilifried and Ulrich E. Wezel. “Photogrammetric Deformation Measurement of Crash Vehicles.” Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE) paper 860207 (1986). ​ ​

Publication White Paper: Motorcycle Accident Reconstruction Techniques Mark Kittel, P.E., D.F.E. Forward Vehicle accident reconstruction is founded upon the scientific principles of conservation of momentum and conservation of energy. Most medium to large size police forces employ individuals who have been trained in the basic reconstruction of vehicle accidents for the primary purpose of determining the speeds of the vehicles involved. Automobile accidents , generally speaking, are relatively simple to reconstruct due to the vast information available related to a vehicle’s crush characteristic as well as the relative ease in understanding the dynamic motion and interactions of automobiles. By contrast, the reconstruction of accident involving motorcycles can be quite complex and challenging to many accident reconstructionists. Proper motorcycle accident reconstruction requires an intimate knowledge of motorcycle dynamics and a strong understanding of how motorcycles react to rider inputs. Introduction to Motorcycle Reconstruction The reconstruction of a motorcycle accident typically progresses in reverse of the chronological events of the accident. Specifically, the reconstruction begins at the point of rest of the motorcycle and/or rider and then works backwards to some point in time prior to the beginning of the accident sequence, such as to when appropriate actions could have prevented the accident. Typically there are up to 5 distinct phases of a motorcycle accident sequence. ​ 1) Perception-Reaction: The first phase of accident analysis actually begins before any impact or accident avoidance occurs and is often referred to as the perception-reaction phase; this is the phase where the rider perceives a hazard in front of him and decides what his response to the hazard will be. Published values for the time it takes a typical rider to perceive a hazard, decide an appropriate course of action and then begin to implement his chosen reaction is on the order of 1.1 to 1.5 seconds. ​ 2) Avoidance - Braking/Steering: After completing the perception-reaction process, the rider typically enters an avoidance phase. During this portion of the accident the rider may decide to steer or brake. If braking is chosen, the rider has the option of applying the front brake alone, the rear brake alone or a combination of both front and rear brakes. The physical evidence at the scene , combined with witness statements, will often give clues as to which course of avoidance was implemented. ​ 3) Pre-impact Sliding: During the braking phase occasionally riders will overuse the vehicle’s brakes which can result in locking the front and/or rear wheel. If the rear wheel locks, with the motorcycle traveling on a straight trajectory, most riders can maintain control of the vehicle for a significant distance. However, if the front wheel locks, it is almost guaranteed that the rider will lose control of the vehicle and crash, usually very quickly. A front wheel lockup can be a fairly common occurrence, especially when executing an emergency braking maneuver. If the rider loses control while braking, the vehicle and rider typically separate and slide along the roadway. The trajectory of the bike and rider usually follows the same trajectory that they were on prior to the loss of control, and can direct the rider right into the impact zone. ​ 4) Impact: During the impact phase, the bike and/or rider may impact some other object, such as a vehicle pulling out in front of them or a stationary object such as a guardrail. Impact damage may be evaluated and combined with the sliding distance to help determine a vehicle’s speed during the accident sequence. ​ 5) Post-impact Motion: After a vehicle and/or rider impacts an object there may be additional post impact movement to the point of final rest. It is common that the rider separates from the motorcycle during the accident sequence and travels independently to rest. Analysis of the post-impact travel distance of both the rider and the vehicle can often yield independent, yet similar results as to speeds associated with the accident. The basis of motorcycle accident reconstructions is similar to that of other accident reconstruction techniques in that it relies upon the basic principles of conservation energy and momentum. However, there are two distinct issues which make motorcycle accident reconstruction more challenging than a typical automobile accident reconstruction. 1) Motorcycle reconstruction often lacks the availability of crash test information , which is vital for performing a crush energy analysis, and 2) understanding the dynamics associated with motorcycle accidents requires an understanding of how a rider interacts with the motorcycle and how a motorcycle responds to rider inputs. Application of “Conservation of Energy” to motorcycle accident reconstruction: Crush Energy One common basis of automobile accident reconstruction is the publication of a vehicle’s “crush stiffness”. In simple terms, crush stiffness is the amount of energy required to cause a specific amount of permanent deformation to a vehicle’s body. The crush stiffness values are typically obtained, for passenger cars, through crash testing of the vehicle into a barrier. The testing is performed by “driving” the vehicle into a barrier at a fixed speed and measuring the permanent deformation of the vehicle’s body. With the availability of the published values for deformation vs. impact speed, a Reconstructionist can then measure the deformation of a similar car and calculate the likely speed which the car was going at impact. This technique is sometimes referred to as “crush energy analysis” and employs the concept of the conservation of energy. By comparison, there is very little information published related to similar crash testing of motorcycles. There have been attempts in the past to crash test motorcycles by running them into fixed objects such as passenger cars or concrete barriers. The SAE publication “17 Motorcycle Crash Tests into Vehicles and a Barrier” reports information and results of crash testing several decommissioned police motorcycles. While the information obtained during these tests is valuable, it is unfortunately limited to a specific type of motorcycle. If one is investigating an accident involving a motorcycle which is similar to the motorcycles tested, then the published information and results are useful. However, if one is attempting to reconstruct an accident involving a sportbike, for example, then relying upon the results reported in the SAE publication is questionable for many reasons. One of the primary reasons that applying the published results to sportbike accidents is that the published crash testing was performed on motorcycles with conventional style forks while most sportbikes employ a cartridge style (or upside down) fork. This distinction is important because the speed estimation equations derived from the crash testing rely upon the vehicle’s wheelbase reduction as a result of fork deformation but the forks on a sportbike do not typically deform like the test motorcycles. The “upside down” style of fork utilized on most sportbikes results in a significantly stiffer fork housing and mounting style. As a result, sportbikes typically experience an entirely different failure mode when the motorcycle is involved in a frontal collision. In many cases, when a sportbike experiences a frontal impact with another object, the failure mode is the fracture or deformation of the mainframe near the steering head while the forks often exhibit minimal deformation damage. By contrast, the failure mode of the tested vehicles was the bending of the fork tubes which resulted in a rearward displacement of the front wheel. Therefore, currently the technique of “crush energy analysis” based upon wheelbase reduction is limited to motorcycles which utilize a fork and mounting structure similar to that of the vehicles involved in the crash testing; i.e. conventional style forks. While the information published in the SAE paper is valuable, like any test results they must be utilized and applied in an appropriate manner for the analysis to be considered accurate. Application of “Conservation of Energy” to motorcycle accident reconstruction: Slide Energy While the analysis method utilizing crush energy may have limited applications for motorcycle accidents, the concept of conservation of energy related to sliding can be applied not only to the vehicle, but also to the rider. In the large majority of motorcycle accidents, the rider separates from the motorcycle at some point during the crash sequence. As a result, a Reconstructionist is able to evaluate not only the motorcycle’s path and travel distance, but the rider’s path and distance can be analyzed, often as a second data point for the purposes of speed estimation. The technique of utilizing slide energy is facilitated by an adequate amount of published information related to the deceleration rates for various motorcycles as well as riders during the sliding phases of a motorcycle accident sequence. Published test results consistently show that motorcycles slide easier than riders on most surfaces. The result of this physical property is that typically the motorcycle will slide further than its rider after the two separate assuming that the vehicle and rider slide independently and do not strike any objects during the slide. Summary In summary, while motorcycle accident reconstruction relies on the basic principles of conservation of energy and momentum, it is the proper application of these principles along with an understanding of motorcycle dynamics and control which result in an accurate reconstruction of motorcycle accidents. ​ ​

About Veritech “When you want to know how things really work, study them when they’re coming apart.” ~ William Gibson ​ Veritech's History Founded in 2008 with the vision to provide the highest quality forensic engineering services to clients. This vision relies on three core values: excellence, honesty, and integrity. The name Veri-tech derives its meaning from the Latin word veritas, meaning truth, and tech, from technology. From its inception, Veritech has dedicated itself to discovering the truth through peer-reviewed forensic engineering techniques and technology. Veritech's commitment to quality rests in our trust that reliable engineering practices, thorough analysis, and an unwavering allegiance to our core values will produce the best results for our clients and customers. Over a decade later, clients that have worked with us can attest to our reliability, quality, and accuracy in the work that we do. ​ ​ Who We Are We are a group of forensic engineering professionals who are experienced and qualified in the areas of accident reconstruction, patent evaluation, mechanical design evaluation, product liability, and failure analysis. Our team consists of licensed Professional Engineers with testimonial experience in both deposition settings and courtroom appearances. Please visit our Accident Reconstruction and Forensic Engineering pages on this website for more information, or contact us directly to speak with one of our professional engineers. ​ ​ What We Do We see ourselves as partners with our clients in the pursuit of the truth; we want to understand what actually happened in order to convey it to our clients. To accomplish this goal we employ our arsenal of engineering expertise, drive for excellence, and technical finesse and apply them to every investigation, whether it involves accident reconstruction, failure analysis, or patent infringement. At the forefront of our efforts is a deep commitment to our clients. We work hard to serve you through honest engineering, accurate answers, and clear communication so that you are equipped to make the best decision possible for your case. No matter how complex the case, we will stand firm in our commitment to excellence, honesty, and integrity. Where We Work Conveniently located near Denver, Colorado, Veritech has investigated matters in all 50 states as well as internationally in Canada and Europe. ​ Mailing Address: ​ Veritech Consulting Engineering, LLC 4833 Front Street, Suite B, #423 Castle Rock, CO 80104 ​

Careers with Veritech Consulting Engineering Hiring Experienced Forensic Engineers! Current Opportunities: Seeking Partner Level Engineer Veritech Consulting Engineering is seeking to expand its capabilities with the addition of Partner level forensic engineers in the fields of Mechanical Engineering, BioMechanical/BioMedical Engineering, Structural/Civil Engineering and Electrical Engineering. Veritech Engineering prides itself on providing the highest quality of engineering consultation to our clients and understands that goal can only be met with the highest quality engineers on staff. As such, we recognize the value of our engineers and provide them with a comfortable work environment and reward them with a generous compensation package. ​ Desired qualifications include: ​ Degree in Engineering from ABET accredited university PE license (multiple states are preferred) DFE Diplomate in Forensic Engineering preferred Deposition and trial testimony experience Strong client references The ability to generate and maintain client relationships Excellent project and case management skills ​ ​ Compensation: ​ For Partner level engineers, Veritech offers flexible work schedules and a compensation package commensurate with each engineer’s experience and productivity. The anticipated salary range for a partner level engineer is $50,000-$150,000 . ​ ​ Additional Benefits: ​ Additional benefits include: Performance-based bonuses Paid time off Company matching of Simple IRA contributions ​ Qualified applicants will possess the highest level of uncompromising ethical standards and should have appropriate forensic engineering experience in their respective fields. Interested candidates should reach out to Veritech at 303-660-4395, or submit a resume by email to info@veritecheng.com . All inquiries will be held in strict confidentiality to protect the applicant.

Winter Sports and Snowmobile Accident Reconstruction Forensic Crash Reconstruction for Snow Sports at Ski Resorts and in the Backcountry Veritech’s forensic engineers have experience analyzing the relatively unique conditions that encompass ski and snowboard accidents and have the expertise to reconstruct these accidents properly. Our office location along the Front Range of Colorado provides us easy access to virtually all major ski resorts in Colorado, Southern Wyoming, and Northern New Mexico within a single day’s trip. Our team is available and ready to respond at a moment’s notice. ​ Ski And Snowboard Accident Reconstruction Accidents that occur within designated ski area or ski resort boundries are unfortunately common and require specialized skill and expertise to address properly. Ski areas, or ski resorts, often have to be designed in such a way that the terrain allows for safe access. Believe it or not, there are even areas where skiers and snowboarders are required to follow traffic flow and “speed limits” while on the mountain. Indeed, ski resorts take their patron’s safety very seriously. Because ski and snowboard accidents, occur on snow covered or icy surfaces which are constantly changing, reconstruction of these accidents pose unique challenges. ​ ​ ​ Groomed versus un-groomed surface, and patches of ice can all affect the surface characteristics in ways that require special attention by a forensic engineer. Additionally, skiers and snowboarders are capable of traversing challenging terrain at very high speeds, sometimes at up to highway speeds. These accidents typically happen on surfaces that are at a significantly steep slope, and can even occur in adverse weather conditions where visibility is an issue. ​ Snowmobile Accident Reconstruction Today's modern snowmobiles, otherwise known as snow machines or simply “sleds”, are becoming more capable, more powerful, and faster than ever before. Snowmobile tracks provide amazing grip on the snowy surface, and are the main component for both forward acceleration and stopping ability. Snowmobile skis typically provide turning abilities in a similar manner to an All-Terrain Vehicle. Trail oriented snowmobiles are capable of achieving triple digit speeds and offer comfort and exceptional handling in harsh winter environments. Groomed Snowmobile trails are considered to be more controlled surfaces as compared to backcountry, or “boon docking” through open, ungroomed areas. Designated routes often see the most snowmobile traffic, however, and are therefore the locations where machine to machine accidents occur most frequently. With further advancement in engine technology and track design, off-trail “mountain” snowmobiles are becoming the fastest growing new category of snowmobile use. These machines have massive horsepower and large tracks that are capable of evacuating snow at a very fast rate. These machines are often used in deep powdery snow, off of designated trails where terrain is steep and snow conditions are constantly changing. In these conditions, skis provide little steering capability due to the lack of traction in deep snowy powder. Instead, these snowmobiles are turned by changing the attitude of the machine (side-to-side) in a rolling manner. When this is accomplished the snowmobile track redirects the snowmobile in the same orientation as the tilt of the snowmobile. In short, turning ability of a snowmobile in back-country conditions is accomplished in a much different manner than a trail oriented snowmobile. Braking and accelerating for mountain snowmobiles is accomplished by controlling the track speed, however the terrain and snow cover greatly affect the machine’s speed over the snow. There are other hybrid off-trail vehicles within the snow machine category as well. "Snow Bikes" are a combination between an off-road motorcycle and a snowmobile. These machines offer another way for users to access the backcountry and are operated in a similar fashion to a motorcycle , with the main difference being that the rear drive wheel is replaced with a track and the front wheel is replaced by a ski. All of these types of machines require skill to operate safely, and issues such as rider dynamics and rider skill level come into consideration during accident reconstruction. ​ ​ Backcountry and Off-Trail Snowsport Accident Reconstruction In addition to accidents that occur in a controlled or groomed snow environment, there are also many incidents that occur outside of boundaries, otherwise known as off-piste, or backcountry. These conditions typically consist of extreme terrain, deep powdery snow, and unstable conditions. Mountain snowmobiling and backcountry skiing or snowboarding all take place in the backcountry where the environment and terrain become much more variable. What’s more, backcountry snow sports are gaining in popularity at an alarming rate, as indicated by recent developments of backcountry designated areas within National Forests as well as the wealth of information on backcountry locations as found on the internet. Many users of these areas are unaware of the hazards that exist, and accidents as a result of inexperience are common. ​ ​ Snow Sport Accident Reconstruction: Things to Consider While there are many similarities between accidents that occur at a ski resort or on a snowmobile trail, it is important to realize two key differences. The first is that oftentimes physical evidence is scarce. For example, there may be tracks leading to the point of impact, or point of rest. However, winter conditions change rapidly, and the conditions at the time of accident may be different than those during investigation. Secondly, it is important to realize that responding emergency personnel are typically not trained in accident reconstruction, and collection of information and evidence by those who are first on the scene may not be sufficient to perform a reconstruction using standard techniques. In addition these personnel, whether they are ski patrol, or National Forest Rangers, are sometimes understaffed during responses. With that being said, Veritech has the ability to extract significant scientific data from information such as video and photographs using the science of photogrammetry , which can greatly improve the quality of reconstruction in adverse winter conditions. Veritech's expertise includes over 20 years of experience in snow sports in-bounds and out-of-bounds. Please contact us today to discuss your case further. Please contact our winter sports and snowmobile expert, Joe Tremblay, P.E., D.F.E. at 303-660-4395 to discuss your case and receive a free initial consultation with honest and candid comments. Joe Tremblay, P.E., D.F.E. Principal Engineer

Accident Reconstruction Crash Analysis by Board Certified Forensic Engineers Veritech’s accident reconstruction engineers are specifically trained and highly experienced in the science of reconstructing motor vehicle accidents. Our engineering experts understand that accidents are a fact of life and unfortunately happen with significant frequency. Some of these accidents involve motor vehicles while others involve industrial equipment and machinery. Veritech engineers have investigated and analyzed thousands of accidents from low-speed single vehicle accidents to multi-car pile ups on busy highways. We understand that each accident has unique circumstances so we utilize the latest accident reconstruction technology, such as information from GPS records, “black box ” download data from a vehicle’s Event Data Recorder, video evidence, and sophisticated 3-dimensional computer simulation software to reach accurate and defendable conclusions. ​ ​ Accident Reconstruction Services Motorcycle Passenger Vehicle UTV, ATV, and Off-Road Motorcycle Commercial Vehicle Pedestrian and Bicycle Winter Sports and Snowmobile Construction and Heavy Equipment Marine and Personal Watercraft Veritech understands our client’s need to know what happened in an accident and why. Our forensic experts are experienced at providing insightful, reliable forensic engineering consultation to ensure that our clients fully understand all of the events surrounding a crash. A complete understanding of the accident scenario allows our clients to make informed decisions regarding the direction of their case. In addition to explaining what happened in an accident, we can also assist in understanding what could have been done to mitigate the severity of the crash or prevent the accident entirely. Veritech Engineers pride themselves in taking the complex dynamics of an accident and presenting them in a clear and understandable manner to our clients, opposing counsel, and ultimately to a jury. ​ ​ Our clients can rest assured knowing that our engineers will provide honest and reliable testimony and that our engineer’s accident reconstruction opinions will be based upon a thorough analysis of the available evidence and the application of well accepted scientific principles. Veritech’s forensic engineering experts have been qualified in state and federal courts around the country to provide expert witness testimony in numerous areas related to accident reconstruction, failure analysis and driver reaction. What is Accident Reconstruction? Accident reconstruction is generally understood to be the application of industry accepted scientific methodologies in order to determine the speeds and actions of the vehicles involved in a motor vehicle collision. Common questions that can be answered by an accident reconstructionist include: How fast were the vehicles going? and What could have been done to avoid the crash? ​ A qualified accident reconstruction expert has multi-disciplinary training and experience in areas such as mechanical engineering, physics, mathematics, vehicle dynamics, and manufacturing methods. Additional analysis tools and training includes the use of computer simulation software (such as PC Crash), Photogrammetry techniques, computer-aided drawing software (such as AutoCAD), and the extraction of crash data from a vehicle’s “black box”. (“Black box” is a generic term that refers to a vehicle’s EDR – Event Data Recorder, or ECM - Engine Control Module). ​ The activities commonly associated with the reconstruction of a motor vehicle accident begin with an inspection and documentation of the available evidence physical and a review of any testimonial evidence from witnesses or involved individuals. The initial documentation of evidence often consists of an “on-scene” investigation completed by the responding police officers. Additional evidence gathering, consisting of vehicle inspections and crash site inspections, can be done by an accident reconstruction expert within days, weeks, or even months of the date of the crash. If the subject vehicles are no longer available, or if the scene related evidence has dissipated, techniques such as Photogrammetry can be utilized to extract information from digital photos or videos. Once all of the available evidence is gathered, an accident reconstruction is then performed to analyze and evaluate the evidence. An accident reconstruction is analogous to assembling a puzzle; each piece of evidence represents a piece of the puzzle which, when properly combined, paints a clear picture of the collision and the events leading up to the incident. ​ ​ Vehicle Inspections: An in-person inspection of a vehicle involved in a crash allows the reconstructionist to observe and evaluate the post-crash condition of the vehicle. Areas of investigation during a vehicle inspection include an assessment of the physical damage sustained during the subject collision as well as an evaluation of the vehicle’s condition prior to the crash. Assessment of the vehicle’s braking system, steering system and condition of the tires can play a role in the reconstruction of the accident and may be considered as factors that contributed to the accident if issues with these systems are found. ​ ​ Depending on the allegations in the case, a detailed investigation and inspection of various vehicle components may be warranted. For example, if there is a question about whether an occupant was wearing a seatbelt, an accident reconstructionist has several avenues for investigating this issue. Such as: ​ “Black Box” (EDR) data : The US Government’s Code of Federal Regulations (Title 49: CFR 563 ) requires that all passenger vehicles which are equipped with an EDR and were manufactured after September 1, 2012 must record the seatbelt usage status for the driver. As such, an accident reconstructionist who has the training and equipment to access the vehicle’s EDR should be able to obtain reliable information about the seatbelt use at the time of a crash. ​ Seatbelt Pre-tensioner activation: Many modern vehicles are equipped with seatbelt pre-tensioners for the front occupants. The purpose of a pre-tensioner is to remove any slack in the seatbelt to ensure that the occupant is in the optimal position during a collision. The deployment of a seatbelt pre-tensioner utilizes a pyro-technic device to remove any excess slack then locks the seatbelt from extending. Evaluating the position of a seatbelt which experienced a pre-tensioner deployment will provide the accident reconstructionist with a reliable basis for concluding whether the seatbelt was being worn at the time of a collision. ​ Witness Marks: When a seatbelt experiences a high loading event (such as in a frontal collision), there are often “witness marks” which remain on the seatbelt and associated components. The keen eye of a qualified accident reconstruction expert is able to identify the location and intensity of any potential witness mark, or lack of witness mark, to help determine whether the seatbelt was worn during the incident. ​ ​ Site Inspection: Inspection of the crash site is often useful for the reconstructionist to understand relevant aspects such as the geometry of the terrain and potential obstructions for sight lines. In addition to documenting a crash site utilizing ground level digital photos, Veritech’s accident reconstruction experts often digitally map the crash site using drone technology or 3-D laser survey equipment. ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ Accident Reconstruction and Forensic Analysis : Once all of the evidence is gathered it can then be analyzed and evaluated for use in the accident reconstruction process. Veritech’s accident reconstruction experts utilize state-of-the-art technology and methodologies to analyze and accurately reconstruct each motor vehicle accident. Our experience and attention to detail allows us to provide a clear and complete assessment of the facts for our clients so that you can make an informed decision on the direction of your case. ​ ​ ​ ​ We would love to hear from you. Please contact Veritech engineering at 303-660-4395 to discuss your case and receive a free initial consultation with honest and candid comments from one of our Certified Forensic Engineers.

Publication White Paper: Operation of the Eaton VORAD Collision Warning System and Analysis of the Recorded Data David Danaher, P.E., Jeff Ball, Ph.D., P.E., Trevor Buss, P.E., and Mark Kittel, P.E., D.F.E. Abstract The Eaton VORAD Collision Warning System is utilized by many commercial trucking companies as a driver’s aid to improve vehicle and driver safety. The system is equipped with forward and side radar sensors that detect the presence and movements of vehicles around the truck and to alert the driver of other vehicles’ proximity. When the sensors detect that the host vehicle is closing on a vehicle ahead at a rate beyond a pre-determined threshold, or that a nearby vehicle is located in a position that may be hazardous, the system warns the driver visually and audibly. The system also monitors parameters of the vehicle on which it is installed, such as the vehicle speed and turn rate, as well as the status of vehicle systems and controls. The monitored data can be captured and recorded by the VORAD system and can be extracted in the event that the vehicle is involved in an accident. The recorded data can show the movement and speed of the host vehicle as well as the position and speeds of other vehicles relative to the host vehicle prior to the incident. This paper will discuss the operation of the VORAD system, including the installation of the system, the configuration of the CPU, and the sources from which data is obtained for the various recorded parameters, as well as the analysis and interpretation of the recorded data. Introduction The Eaton VORAD EVT-300 Collision Warning System is designed to assist the driver in detecting potential hazards, and also to reduce the likelihood of accidents and promote safer driving habits. The EVT-300 Collision Warning System is a high frequency radar system that can be fitted to most commercial vehicles. The EVT-300 is designed to detect potential hazards in the surrounding area of the vehicle and to warn the driver of those potential hazards. The system can track multiple vehicles at one time that are traveling in front or to the side of the host vehicle. If there is a potential hazard detected by the EVT-300, the system warns the driver by means of a small display mounted in the driver compartment which emits a series of lights and audible sounds in intervals from three seconds to a half-second to warn the driver prior to an accident occurring [3]. Description of Components The EVT-300 is an aftermarket unit that is designed to be installed on a variety of commercial trucks and to interface with the base ECM. The system consists of an antenna assembly (forward looking radar), optional side sensor, central processing unit (CPU) with gyroscope, driver display, optional side sensor display, and wiring harness. Antenna Assembly - The antenna assembly mounts to the front of the truck and transmits and receives low power, high frequency radar signals. The radar signal has a 12 degree beam width and has a range up to 350 feet, the system can monitor 20 objects simultaneously, regardless if the objects are moving or not. The signals are transmitted from the antenna assembly away from the front of the truck and towards an object within the radars range. The radar signal then reflects off the object and is received back by the antenna assembly. The system uses the Doppler effect to determine relative speeds of other vehicles compared to the speed of the host vehicle. The antenna assembly then compares the difference between the transmitted signal and the received signal, and processes the data. The data is then digitally converted and sent to the central processing unit for further evaluation [4]. The total system has an accuracy of: range 5% ±3 feet, velocity 1% ±0.2 mph, Azimuth ±0.2 degrees [3]. Central Processing Unit - The central processing unit (CPU) is essentially the brain of the unit in conjunction with the forward and side sensors. The CPU collects the data from the attached VORAD sensors (forward antenna, side sensor and internal gyroscope) as well as from the host vehicle’s ECM (vehicle speed, brake signal, and turn signals). The CPU analyzes the data to determine if there is a potential hazard for the driver and sends the appropriate signal to the driver display unit if necessary. The CPU also has an optional function that can be used for accident reconstruction that records data in the CPU memory for several minutes prior to an accident. The data can then be downloaded by Eaton VORAD at their facilities [4]. The memory feature will be discussed in further detail later in this paper. Gyroscope - The gyroscope is located in the CPU and monitors the rate at which the vehicle is turning. The gyroscope is designed to measure the orientation of the vehicle based on the principles of angular momentum [4]. Driver Display Unit - The driver display unit (DDU) has two control knobs, one for the range and the other for the volume, three colored (yellow, orange, red) warning lights, a green power light, a red system failure light, and a light sensor. The unit is also equipped with a speaker that produces audible tones to alert or warn the driver if the vehicle is near an approaching object. The unit may also have a slot to allow an optional Driver Identification Card [4]. Side Sensor - The side sensor is similar to the antenna assembly in that it transmits a radar signal. The sensor can detect objects from two to ten feet from the side of the truck, typically the right. The data is then sent to the CPU for processing which then determines if any lights or audible warnings are necessary for the driver [4]. Side Sensor Display - The side sensor display has a yellow “no vehicle detected” indicator light and a red “vehicle detected” light. The display also has an ambient light sensor to allow the automatic adjustment of the lights in various ambient lighting conditions [4]. Wiring Harness - The wiring harness is used to connect all the external inputs and sensors such as the CPU, antenna assembly, driver display unit, side sensor, and side sensor display. Data Acquisition The VORAD EVT 300 system obtains accident reconstruction related data from the host vehicle for three vehicle parameters: host vehicle speed, brake status, and turn signal activity. The host vehicle speed data is produced independently of the VOARAD system; the VORAD system simply monitors and records the speed data produced by the vehicle. This data can be acquired by wiring directly from the vehicle’s speedometer circuitry, or from the vehicle’s central data bus. In either case, the source of the vehicle speed data is the same as the data that is utilized by the vehicle’s speedometer. In typical modern heavy truck installations, speedometer data is typically produced by a system that monitors the electronic pulses from a sensor reading a toothed wheel that is incorporated into the vehicle’s drive train. The speedometer system is calibrated to the number of pulses per revolution of the sensing wheel, the number of revolutions per mile of the drive wheels on the truck, and the necessary gear ratios. Therefore, the accuracy and precision of the host vehicle speed data reported by the VORAD system is entirely dependent on that of the vehicle’s own speed monitoring system. Changes to vehicle equipment, such as non-OEM wheels and tires, may affect the calibration of the speed monitoring system, and situational occurrences such as locked or semi-locked drive axles during braking may affect the accuracy of the data. Therefore, considerations should be made when interpreting the speed data reported by the VORAD system. The data available regarding the status of the host vehicle’s brakes is again acquired either through a direct connection to the vehicle’s brake light circuitry, or through the central data bus. The EVT-300 system monitors and records only the binary status of the brake system; i.e. whether the brakes are on or off. This data corresponds with the activation of the host vehicle’s brake lights. Therefore, while the system will record information as to when the vehicles brakes are applied, it does not monitor the level at which the driver applies the brakes, or the level of depression of the brake pedal. The EVT-300 system does report on the level of deceleration of the vehicle by way of a thin or thick line in the data plots that can be produced by the system, but this information is obtained by derivation of the speed data and not from the brake circuitry. The VORAD system monitors turn signal activity directly from the turn signal light bulb circuitry. Similar to the brake system, the EVT-300 only monitors the binary status of the turn signal circuitry. In some installations with a single side radar sensor mounted on the right, the VORAD system may only monitor the status of the right-side turn signal circuitry. Otherwise, the system records turn signal activation when either the right or left turn signal or the four-way emergency flashers are activated, and it does not distinguish which type of activation is occurring. The source of the recorded turn signal activity can be determined through review of the CPU configuration and inspection of the system installation. ​ Recorded Data One of the most valuable features of the Eaton VORAD system is its ability to provide a commercial truck driver with additional information and warnings that enhance driver awareness and ultimately highway safety. In addition to this, the VORAD system also has the ability to record and store the data that it monitors. This information can be invaluable to an accident investigator or reconstructionist should the vehicle be involved in an accident. The VORAD system records data from the truck on which it is installed that is typical of other Event Data Records that are increasingly common on heavy trucks today, such as speed, control status, and fleet maintenance information. Additionally, the VORAD system also has the ability to record information regarding other vehicles in the vicinity of the host vehicle that may be involved in the accident with the truck through the use of its radar sensor system. This additional benefit is unique relative to typical truck EDR’s , and may provided evidence to a reconstructionist that would otherwise be unavailable. System Memory - The EVT-300 system is capable of recording between approximately 2 and 10 minutes of data. The total amount of recorded time is dependent on the number of objects that the system is detecting during the time period. In other words, as more objects are detected by the system, more memory is required for each time step, and the total duration of recorded time is reduced. The memory of the system acts as a rolling buffer; as the truck continues to drive, the oldest data is overwritten by the newest data. If the truck stops, the most recent data remains in the system. If it is deemed necessary (as in the event of a motor vehicle accident) the CPU memory can be frozen such that it will not be overwritten if the truck continues to drive. The memory is frozen by pushing the “Range” button on the driver display unit for approximately 5 seconds. The stored memory is confirmed by a green light on the display unit blinking 8 times. Furthermore, the system contains two memory “sections” in which it can record data. When the first memory section is frozen, data is then recorded in the second memory section. If the truck has not been driven after the first memory section has been frozen, no data will be present in the second memory section. It should be noted that in some versions of the VORAD system, the frozen memory section may be cleared if the data has not been extracted within 30 days. This will only occur if the truck has been driven or if power is supplied to the unit after the memory is frozen. The CPU contains a battery back-up system that allows the recorded data to be retained for approximately 5 years without power supplied to the CPU. In the event that the VORAD memory has been frozen, the VORAD CPU can be removed from the vehicle and sent to Eaton VORAD for extraction. This process involves transferring the CPU data to a separate memory card, and then reading the extracted data using proprietary software developed by Eaton. Once the data has been transferred from the CPU to the memory card, it is automatically erased from the CPU. An important step in the extraction processes involves correlating the recorded time and date on the CPU data to the actual time of the extraction. This is done so that any discrepancy in the CPU time versus the actual time of extraction can be accounted for to determine the specific time of occurrences that may be shown in the data reports. Data Reports - After the data has been extracted by Eaton, the information is then presented in the form of a Basic Data Report, available from Eaton VORAD for a fee. The Basic Data Report generally includes approximately 5 minutes of data, typically correlated to the likely event of interest, such as a clear hard braking occurrence in the data. The Basic Data Report includes a series of graphical plots that depict the recorded parameters in a visual form, as well as a section that describes data presented in the graphical plots (although only in a generic sense and not specific to the subject data). AR Data Header – The AR Data header “provides information about the VORAD model, software type, vehicle ID and other pertinent system information.” This data also contains information about the contents and status of the system memory. For example, the second line of the AR Data header indicates whether the CPU memory was frozen by displaying a “0” for no or a “1” for yes. There are 4 lines in the AR Data header that begin with “cr:” The first two lines refer to the first memory section, and the third and fourth lines refer to the second memory section. If no data was recorded in the second memory section, the “count” value (denoted “cnt”) will read 0. CPU Configuration – The CPU Configuration section of the data report contains information regarding the settings for the system, the installation of the system, and as well certain “checks” in place to confirm the validity of the system configuration. The data validity checks are located in the first two lines of the configuration table. The first is denoted “S,CERROR.” A value of 1000 following this indicates that the system performed a successful reading of the CPU configuration. The next check is denoted “S,PERROR” and for this, a value of F indicates that no single value of the CPU configuration was read incorrectly. The remainder of the CPU configuration parameters are presented by the parameter name, followed by the value to which the parameter is set, and then a description of either the value that is indicated, or of the binary logic that applies to the parameter. The details of the CPU Configuration parameters are shown in Appendix A. Graphical Plots – The Basic Data Report contains graphical plots of the data that has been extracted from the VORAD CPU. A detailed description of the data that is presented in the graphs is included with the Data Reports; therefore this paper will provide a brief overview and focus on details that are not discussed in the provided material. There are 9 parameters represented on the graphical plots: ​ Object Distance (feet) – This plot shows the distance from the radar on the host vehicle to the various objects that the system detects. The system uses different colors on the plot to differentiate between the various objects that the system picks up. However, there may be occasions in which the object detection signal is weak or is lost for a brief period, and when the system re-establishes a signal for the object, it may assign a new color to the object when in fact it is the same object that was previously depicted. This occurrence can be recognized by examining the trend of the line shown in the graph. Cross Range (feet) – This plot shows the lateral distance of the detected objects relative to the projected centerline of the host vehicle. The colors shown on this plot correspond with those of the Object Distance plot. It is noted in the provided description of this graph that this data is not adjusted relative to the turn rate data for the host vehicle. Therefore the data shown in this plot will be affected when the vehicles are driving in a curve.Although this is how the data is depicted in the graph, the CPU does account for the road curvature when issuing driver alerts. Object Speed (miles per hour) – This plot shows the ground speed of the objects being detected by the radar, again with colors that correspond with those in the Object Distance plot. This data is calculated based on the recorded speed of the host vehicle and the relative speed of the detected objects as measured by the radar. Host Speed (miles per hour) – This plot shows the ground speed of the host vehicle. The actual speed data points are depicted as dots, and a line is fit to these data points. Data values for the host speed are recorded when there is a change in the speed of the vehicle. Host Turn Rate (degrees per second) – This plot shows the rate of change of the directional heading of the host vehicle. It is important to recognize that this plot does not depict the vehicle’s heading. The actual vehicle heading is a function of the turn rate and the speed that the vehicle is traveling. The color of the turn rate plots corresponds to calculated lateral acceleration thresholds that the vehicle reached. Brake Status – This plot depicts a line that shows when the brakes are activated. The thickness of this line is determined by the rate of change of the speed data that is acquired from the vehicle. A thicker line indicates a greater rate of deceleration. The thickness of the line depicted is therefore not a direct measure of how hard the brakes are applied. Alarm Status – The type of alarm that is activated is depicted by the coded color and thickness of the line. A thicker line does not indicate an increase in the volume of the alarm, although the thicker lines depict alarm levels that correspond to a greater level of emergency. Side Sensor Status – Displays when an object is detected by the side sensor. The width of the line on the side sensor plot indicates whether the first or second (or both) side sensor has been activated. A narrow line indicates side sensor #1, a medium line indicates side sensor #2, and a thick line indicates that both side sensors are detecting an object. It cannot be determined from the data if a single vehicle or multiple vehicles are being detected by the side sensors. Turn Signal Status – Displays when the host vehicle turn signal is activated. If only the right side turn signal is connected to the unit, the system will not record an activation when the left turn signal is activated. If both the left and right turn signals are connected to the unit, one cannot determine which direction of turn signal is activated from the data. Summary The Eaton VORAD Collision Warning System is unique tool in the commercial trucking industry that helps warn drivers of potential hazards and improves driver safety. In addition to improving highway safety the system also has the ability to store data that can be extremely helpful in the course of an accident investigation . When provided with this data it is beneficial to the investigator to have knowledge of the function and operation of the system, its proper installation, and the ways in which the data is acquired and interpreted. References Murphy, Donald O., and Woll, Jerry D., “A review of the VORAD Vehicle Detection and Driver Alert System”, SAE 922495. Woll, Jerry D., “Vehicle Collision Warning System with Data Recording Capability”, SAE 952619. EVT-300 Collision Warning System: Product literature, Eaton VORAD Technologies, LLC, 13100 E. Michigan Ave., Galesburg, MI 49053, June 2000. EVT-300 Collision Warning System: Installation Guide, Eaton VORAD Technologies, LLC, 13100 E. Michigan Ave., Galesburg, MI 49053, February 2002. EVT-300 Collision Warning System: Driver Instructions, Eaton VORAD Technologies, LLC, 13100 E. Michigan Ave., Galesburg, MI 49053, June 2003. Chakraborty, Shubhayu, Gee, Thomas A., Smedley, Dan, “Advanced Collision Avoidance Demonstration for Heavy-Duty Vehicles, SAE 962195 ​ ​

Forensic Engineering Product Liability, Failure Analysis, Design Defects, and Patent Infringement Issues Analyzed by Board Certified Forensic Engineers Veritech Consulting Engineering employs licensed professional forensic engineers for the investigation and analysis of mechanical failures and motor vehicle accidents. Veritech’s forensic engineers are experienced in product failure analysis and product liability investigation as well as reviewing complex engineering designs for the analysis and evaluation of patent infringement claims. Veritech engineers are selected for their unique and varied backgrounds which enable them to approach complicated problems from several different viewpoints to ensure thorough and accurate solutions. Our extensive experience in forensic engineering matters includes investigations ranging from motor vehicle accidents to unique incidents involving medical equipment failures, construction accidents and various manufacturing or design defects. ​ Forensic Engineering Services: Product Liability and Failure Analysis Patent Infringement Analysis and Evaluation "Black Box" Downloads and Analysis 3-D Drone Surveying and Photogrammetry Courtroom Graphics and Exhibits What is Forensic Engineering? In simple terms, Forensic Engineering involves the investigation of mechanical failures. More specifically, forensic engineering is the application of engineering principles and practices in the analysis of evidence to determine the root cause of a failure or mishap; sometimes this is referred to as “reverse engineering”. Mechanical failures can often be attributed to design defects, manufacturing defects, improper maintenance, or misuse of the product. Forensic engineers may be called upon to investigate a failure for litigation purposes (involving personal injury or large financial loss) or they can be utilized to improve the performance of a product. ​ ​ When is a Forensic Engineer Needed? When a product failure or an accident occurs, it is often accompanied by personal injury or large financial loss. In these situations insurance companies and attorneys are often involved to settle claims or disputes. Forensic engineers are enlisted to assist insurance companies and attorneys with the analysis of the evidence and to determine the cause, or contributing causes, of the failure or mishap. In litigation related investigations, forensic engineers work as independent and unbiased experts to determine the series of events which led to the failure or accident. Once an engineer reaches their conclusions or opinions, they will often detail their findings in a formal report that may be submitted to the court for review by opposing parties or opposing experts. The forensic engineer may also be called upon to provide expert testimony, under oath, regarding the opinions expressed in their report and to answer questions about the methodologies and findings that were relied upon to reach their conclusions. Expert testimony can be required for either a deposition setting, during the discovery process, or at trial in the presence of a judge and jury. The expert testimony provided by a forensic engineer helps explain the engineering analysis that was performed in order to reach a conclusion regarding the origin of a failure. In this setting, it is valuable for the engineer to be able to break down complex engineering principles and present them in an easily understandable manner for the non-technical members of a jury. ​ Common Sources of a Product Failure: Veritech’s Forensic Engineers have performed hundreds of investigations related to product failures and motor vehicle accident reconstructions. Based upon our experience, we have found that the root cause of many failures can be grouped into four main categories: design defects, manufacturing defects, improper maintenance, or misuse. ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ Design Defects: Design defects can be identified by the presence of multiple similar failures of a particular product during foreseeable use. The presence of numerous “other similar incidents”, or OSIs, is an indication of a systemic problem or weakness that is present in all, or many, of the products as manufactured. Examples of design defects include incorrect material specification, improper part thickness, inadequate clearance between parts, or failure to consider the “tolerance stack-up” of an assembly. ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ Manufacturing Defects: Manufacturing defects may present themselves as less common occurrence of a failure under reasonable or anticipated usage. Manufacturing defects can originate from improper manufacturing processes as well as improper assembly. The investigation of manufacturing defects may require a multi-disciplinary approach, incorporating the expertise of material engineers, manufacturing engineers, mechanical engineers, etc. ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ Improper Maintenance: Many products and machines have a manufacturer’s specified maintenance schedule. The maintenance schedule will typically include the replacement of parts which are consumable during use (such as a car’s brake pads) as well as the inspection of parts which are prone to wear out over time (such as articulating joints and pivot points). If the manufacturer’s maintenance recommendations are not adhered to, the result can be excessive play or failure which leads to an incident. ​ ​ ​ ​ Product Misuse: Most of the products which are involved in personal injury or large financial loss require interaction by an operator. Misuse of the product by an operator can take the form of inadequate training or intentional misuse. Failure of an operator to follow training guidelines, operator manuals, or on-product warnings can expose the operator, as well as by-standers, to unnecessary risk of injury. ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ Mitigation of Potential Hazards: There are several methods, techniques, and practices which have been developed to assist manufacturers and design engineers in the proper development of consumer level products. Various risk management tools such as FMEA, Design Hierarchy, and ANSI warning label requirements have been developed to identify and mitigate potential risks. FMEA, which stands for Failure Mode Effects Analysis, is a system that was developed in the 1940’s by the US Military to identify all possible failures in the design, manufacturing, and assembly processes of a product. FMEA has been widely accepted by virtually all major manufacturers of consumer goods as a process analysis tool to identify and eliminate potential failure modes of their product. When properly performed, this step-by-step analysis process allows manufacturers to identify potential problems before they enter the marketplace and take appropriate steps to mitigate the risks to consumers. The Design Hierarchy (or Safety Hierarchy) is a theory related to the proper way to mitigate risks; sometimes referred to the “Design-Guard-Warn” hierarchy. The theory essentially states that the most desirable way to mitigate a hazard is to design the product in a manner in which the hazard does not exist. If the hazard cannot be designed out of the product then the product should contain a guard to prevent the user from encountering the hazard. If it is not possible to design around the hazard or guard against the hazard, then the manufacturer should provide an effective warning to inform the user of the potential hazard. In order for a warning to be effective, it must contain the proper information. The information required for a warning label has been standardized by the American National Standards Institution in the standard designated as ANSI/NEMA Z535.4. Z535.4 states that “A product safety sign or label should alert persons to a specific hazard, the degree or level of hazard seriousness, the probable consequence of involvement with the hazard, and how the hazard can be avoided.” In other words, an effective warning will describe what the hazard is, state what the consequences of the hazard are, and tell the user how to avoid the hazard. Veritech’s forensic engineering team has the training, education, and experience to investigate and analyze incidents involving failures and mishaps associated with a wide variety of mechanical products. Our team has first-hand, industry experience in the engineering, design, development and manufacture of various consumer products and medical equipment. Additionally, our team has been qualified by both state and federal courts and has presented sworn testimony of their investigation findings and conclusions at depositions and trials for consideration by judges and juries. ​

TIPS