Three construction workers survived a scaffolding collapse because of their fall protection equipment. The harnesses and support wires prevented the men from falling 15 stories and allowed rescuers to take them inside the building while they were hanging more than 100 feet in the air. This case is an example of how effective fall protection equipment can be when used properly.

Read the full article here.

A driver involved in a fatal accident with a cyclist has reportedly stated that sun glare prevented him from seeing the bicycle in time to avoid the accident, which occurred at 5:35 p.m. in March. According to news reports, the driver told police that the sun was directly in his eyes as he was making a left turn at 15 mph. Sun glare can be an important consideration when investigating traffic accidents. Astronomical tables and calculations allow accident investigators to determine the sun’s position in the sky at the time of an accident to evaluate a driver’s claims of sun glare. This evaluation can be aided by computer animations or by returning to the accident scene at a time when the sun’s position is similar to the time of the accident and making observations.

Read the full article here.

A 63 year old bicyclist was badly injured when an 80 year old driver crashed into him on a Brooklyn street, according to officials. The driver was apparently fleeing from another accident in which he had crashed into a school bus minutes earlier and kept going, according to police. One witness “heard the screeching of the tires” and “saw the man fly over the car and land on the windshield.” This post impact motion is common to many bicycle and motorcycle collisions with cars. Once the cyclist is thrown off his bike, he may land on the car hood-windshield area or he may travel over the car and land on the ground. In either case, such accidents can produce severe injuries to the cyclist, who is likely to have little impact protection, other than a helmet.

Read the full article here.

A man was electrocuted when a ladder he and a co-worker were attempting to setup accidentally contacted a live power line. To avoid these types of accidents, OSHA regulation 1926.1053(b)(12) requires that ladders used where the employee or the ladder could contact exposed energized electrical equipment must have have non-conductive side rails. For this reason, many ladders have fiberglass side rails, which do not conduct electricity.
Read the full article here.

Consumer Union reports that certain model Jeep vehicles have experienced a problem with inadvertent air bag deployments. Airbags are an important technology for improving occupant safety in many crashes. However, many airbags deploy at such a high speed, that they can actually cause injuries when they deploy at the wrong time. Read the full article here.

Forensic engineering deals with determining how an accident occurred and what, if anything, could have been reasonably done to foresee and prevent the accident.  We have been serving attorneys for both plaintiffs and defendants for decades in all types of litigation matters.  We have experts who are skilled in accident reconstruction, biomechanics, mechanical engineering, civil engineering, and related fields.  Our engineers are also members of ANSI national standards committees, and are actively involved in safety research and publication.  Recent areas of publication by our staff include golf cart safety, balance and ladder safety.  We also have the capability to prepare sophisticated simulations and animations to clearly demonstrate to a jury how an accident occurred.

Our team of engineers is capable of investigating a wide range of accidents, and we have cultivated a network of consultants who are able to handle cases outside of our area of expertise.  Call us to see if we can help you with your case.

Our electrical engineers have experience investigating many kinds of electrical accidents.  We have served as expert witnesses for both plaintiffs and defendants in a number of cases.

Common accidents that a forensic electrical engineer would investigate include product failures, electrical shocks, electrical fires, and electrical burns.

Electric shocks can occur due to improperly designed, manufactured, or maintained equipment and appliances. When electric shocks cause damage to humans or even result in death (defined as an electrocution), then improper control or isolation of the associated electric power must be investigated. Shocks are typically caused by faulty ground connections, inadequate insulation, or improper circuit design. Establishing the causes of shocks and their effect  is key to establishing liability in these cases.

Electrical fires are caused by hear being released as electricity is dissipated through a resistive element, while the fuel to support combustion may come from the surroundings or from the material that makes up the appliance. When analyzing an electrical fire, it is important to find the origin of the fire as well as the safety precautions that could have prevented the fire. Common causes of electrical fires and explosions include insufficient insulation and improper grounding.

Electric burns are a common result of the use of heat massage or electrical stimulation, and can be caused by other defective or mis-used electrical appliances. A common cause of such a burn involves the use of a TENS (transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulator). Our electrical engineering experts also have experience with contact burns originating from electric current, even if the current levels are below those that would cause shock or electrocution. We are also proficient in non-contact burns that involve “action-at-a-distance”, aka indirect or non-contact electric burns.

Our licensed electrical engineering experts can investigate your case to determine the cause of an electrical accident and determine what could have been done to prevent it.  We have years of experience assisting attorneys for both plaintiffs and defendants by serving as engineering expert witnesses numerous cases involving electrical accident investigation.

Electric burns are a common result of the use of heat massage or electrical stimulation, and can be caused by other defective or mis-used electrical appliances. A common cause of such a burn involves the use of a TENS (transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulator). Our electrical engineering experts also have experience with contact burns originating from electric current, even if the current levels are below those that would cause shock or electrocution. We are also proficient in non-contact burns that involve “action-at-a-distance”, aka indirect or non-contact electric burns.

In 2006 a construction worker was seriously injured after his job foreman ordered him to ride in a makeshift trash box on a forklift to access an elevated work area. Forklifts are generally not designed to provide people with access to heights unless equipped with an approved personnel lift accessory basket or similar accessory. The improper use of a forklift for this purpose can often lead to significant falls and serious injuries. In this case, the accident resulted in the largest pretrial settlement in Connecticut history. Read the full article here.

In an effort to address the large number of serious hand and finger injuries that occur each year, the U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission voted unanimously to publish an advance notice of proposed rulemaking (ANPR) aimed at improving the safety of table saws. The proposal is to require performance standards for a detection and reaction system (for example, Saw Stop technology) to reduce or prevent table saw blade contact injuries. Read the full article here.

Animations are a powerful tool to illustrate how an accident occurred, and to make an engineer’s accident reconstruction more accessible to individuals without engineering expertise. In a recent case, we were able to make a 3d animation that showed the plaintiff’s description of how an accident occurred was not consistent with the forensic evidence at the scene. We were also able to compare our animation to a security video from a nearby gas station that captured the accident, showing that our reconstruction and animation matched the security video footage (see comparison to the left).

On a clear fall day, a motorcycle operator was driving westbound along a two lane road behind a Ford pickup truck. As they both approached a nearby intersection, the Ford turned right into a gas station on the corner, while the motorcycle rider continued straight. At the same time, a Chevy pickup towing a utility trailer, which was waiting to exit the same gas station, began making a left turn into the eastbound lanes, while another eastbound vehicle was waiting to enter the gas station. Consequently, before the Chevy driver completed its left turn, he struck the right side of the motorcycle, knocking it over, causing it to leave a gouge mark in the road and severely injuring the rider. However, during their depositions, the defendant Chevy pickup driver as well as two nearby eyewitness claimed that the Ford pickup driver had stopped in the road to let the Chevy turn and that the motorcycle must have driven around the left side of the Ford, making an improper passing maneuver. Fortunately, the motions of the vehicles prior to and during the accident were partially captured by two security cameras at the nearby gas station. Technology Associates was asked to perform an accident reconstruction and accident animation based upon the physical evidence and the available security camera video.

The available surveillance video of the accident showed partially obscured views of the vehicles up to, including and beyond the moment of impact in the background region of two separate security cameras. In both camera views, the Chevy pickup and trailer were clearly visible, allowing us to determine that after the driver pulled away from the gas pump, he waited approximately 15 seconds from the time he came to a stop in the parking lot exit to the time he pulled out into the road. The Ford pickup first entered the security camera field of view approximately 1 second after the Chevy started its left turn, directly contradicting the Chevy driver’s testimony. Furthermore, during the time it was visible in the surveillance footage, the Ford pickup truck was never located in the same position in two consecutive frames, indicating that it was constantly in motion during this time, regardless of whether or not it came to a stop while it was off camera.

Technology Associates was also able to identify the motorcycle in several video frames, by comparing certain successive frames from immediately before the moment of impact. Based on this video analysis, combined with an inspection of the scene and the location of the gouge marks in the roadway, we were able to prove, irrefutably, that the motorcycle did not pass the Ford pickup while it was stopped as several witnesses had testified.

The surveillance video also allowed us to perform a vehicle motion analysis based upon our inspection of the accident site and the subject vehicles, thus determining the position of each vehicle at various moments in time relative to features of the scene and other landmarks measured at our inspections. In addition, we were able to calculate certain vehicle speeds for those vehicles that were visible in multiple video frames. This was relevant because the Chevy driver testified that the impact occurred in the eastbound lane (i.e. that the motorcycle had left his proper lane of travel), but by analyzing the surveillance footage, we were able to demonstrate that the impact actually occurred in the motorcycle’s westbound lane. This motion analysis was then combined with all the other available information to create computer-generated three-dimensional animations of the accident.

The animations not only matched the surveillance video, but also showed the vehicle motions from alternate points of view, that were not obscured. Upon showing these animations to the defendant, the plaintiff was able to obtain a favorable settlement.

A falling piece of rebar recently struck a young boy in the hand at the world trade center construction site. The four foot long iron rod fell through a small gap in a platform used to suspend construction staff in the air while they work on the building’s exterior. Such construction site scaffolding is typically designed not only to provide an elevated platform for construction workers, but also to protect people passing below the construction zone from falling objects. In this case, it appears that a gap in the scaffolding was large enough to allow a piece of rebar to fall through, endangering pedestrians below. Read the full article here.

One common type of bicycle accident actually involves collisions with vehicles that are not moving. When a vehicle door is flung open in the path of a bicyclist, serious injuries can results. When a cyclist is “doored”, he can be thrown from his bike resulting in fall-related injuries or even become exposed to passing vehicles. Read the full article here.

With many Toyota sudden acceleration lawsuits progressing, Toyota has voiced certain intellectual property concerns about allowing plaintiff experts access to the computer codes that control their vehicles. Toyota has disputed any flaws in its electronic throttle control system and NHTSA investigations have found no causes for unintended acceleration other than sticking accelerator pedals and floor mats that jammed the pedals. Read the full article here.

Yet another report of a serious golf cart accident involving a rollover while traveling down a hill. Read the full article here.

To learn more about one of the most common causes of these accidents, read here.

This neighborhood’s residents are asking for a crosswalk to be added to an intersection some describe as a “death zone.” Crosswalks are one common type of traffic calming device used to reduce pedestrian-vehicle conflicts. Read the full article here.

Structural failure can often produce catastrophic results. In many cases, the damage seen after the accident is not indicative of the cause of the initial failure. Fortunately, based on physical evidence, an investigator can frequently determine how and why a structure failed. The most common reasons for a failure include defective materials, defective design, improper assembly, excessive or improper loading or a combination of these. Through testing and structural analysis, it is possible to determine the root cause of the failure and propose solutions to prevent such failures from reoccurring.

Scaffolds (structurally supported or suspended) provide elevated work platforms for tasks such as construction, repair and cleaning. There are many different types of scaffolds including fixed structures (davit), mobile (rolling), suspended (swinging), motorized and others. Falls from height are one of the most significant occupational hazards, thus special care must be practiced to insure that appropriate safety systems are in place to protect scaffold users and bystanders. These include guard railings and fall protection equipment. Some scaffolds involve multiple personnel and motorized suspension systems that must be synchronized for leveling and vertical travel, while others rely on structural design to minimize instability and sway. As a result, scaffolding accidents have a wide variety of root causes. Construction codes and safety standards often dictate the manner of construction and worker protection required for a given application. With the appropriate installation, safety equipment, and user practices, work from scaffolds can be done safely; however, serious accidents can occur if adequate precautions are not taken.

The CPSC is looking into an invention that can stop a saw blade upon contact with a person, before serious injury occurs. Power saws are estimated to lead to 10 finger amputations per day and, by one estimate, each table saw causes a harm to society far in excess of its sale price.
Click here to read the full article by Jayne O’Donnell in USA TODAY.

View examples of our past case work.