2025 EDR Summit Presentations

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

TM

Proceedings of the 2025 edr user’s summit

the collected, distributable materials from the 2025 EDR user’s summit

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

The 2025 User’s SummitTM Presentations • The 2025 EDR User’s SummitTM is in the books and we know everyone’s eager to get their copies of the presentations and that’s what this special issue contains.

You can download a copy of this 950+ page issue in PDF format and save it to your computer.

• It is, however, protected to protect the work of the authors. Please understand that slides with videos don’t work well in PDF and several authors wanted to protect their proprietary video work so videos have been removed.

• Now, we start making plans for the 2026 EDR user’s Summit. At this point, we’re planning for late February 2026, likely returning to the Sheraton in Houston (we’re actively working with the hotel on dates for 2026).

• Potential speakers have already been lining up. Additional announcements will be made later and we’ll be opening opportunities up to other speakers.

Representative subjects and new research will always, of course, be welcome.

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

2025 User’s SummitTM Presentations Index • Bosch CDR Tool update

p2

• SAE Committee update on the status of 49CFR563 p42 • Artificial Intelligence “101”

p100

• Access and Retrieval of Rivian EDR Data p119

March 10-12, 2025

• Data from Airbag Modules Recovered from Car Fires P195 • Analysis of the application of "nonstandard" data retrieval tools P254 • Delta V from Speed Data

P397

• Time & Dist Analysis using Pre-Crash data relative to Time Zero P503

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

2025 User’s SummitTM Presentations Index • Nondestructive Data Retrieval From Damaged Modules P612 • How AI will play a role in cars, crash investigation and data analysis P675 • Pedestrian Data from Pedestrian P697 Event Systems

March 10-12, 2025

• PI and expert witness licensing considerations with an eye on EDR data retrieval P802 • Hyundai – Kia Update

P51

• Tesla Considerations

P907

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

CDR - PAST, PRESENT & FUTURE MAR 11, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Agenda

1.Introduction 2.What’s New since the 2024 EDR User’s Summit?

3.Product Updates in 2024 4.What’s Coming Automotive Service Solutions | MA-AS/PAD-PRM2 | 2025-03-11 © 2025 Bosch Automotive Service Solutions Inc. and affiliates. All rights reserved.

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

CDR – Past, Present & Future Introduction  Bill Rose and Adam Kilanowski  Bosch Automotive Service Solutions  Bill: Global Product Manager responsible for the CDR Tool (worldwide) ‒ Located in Central Coast, California

Bosch Automotive Service Solutions Inc. - Owatonna, Minnesota, USA

 Adam: Technical Specialist / Content Manager ‒ Located in Owatonna, Minnesota

 Managed product and development since 2005  Then only 2 OEMs  To date, CDR Tool now supports 25 OEMs (worldwide)

 Engineering based out of Owatonna Minnesota and Bangalore India.

Bosch Global Software Technologies Private Limited Bangalore, India

3

Automotive Service Solutions | MA-AS/PAD-PRM2 | 2025-03-11 © 2025 Bosch Automotive Service Solutions Inc. and affiliates. All rights reserved.

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

CDR – Past, Present & Future What’s New since the 2024 Presentation  Continued to add new vehicle support to CDR2 application worldwide

 v23.4 release, Dec 2023  v23.4 patch1 - Jan 2024  v23.4 patch2 - Mar 2024

 v24.0 release, Mar 2024

 Started migrating CANplus module support to CDR 900

‒ v24.0 patch1 - Apr 2024 ‒ v24.0 patch2 - Jun 2024

 Bosch posted 13 releases (4 major and 9 patches) in 2024

 v24.1 release - Jul 2024 ‒ 24.1 patch1 - July 2024 ‒ 24.1 patch2 - Aug 2024

 v24.2 release, Oct 2024

 Released 13 new CDR cables

‒ 24.2 patch1 – Oct 2024

 v24.3 release, December 2024 ‒ 24.3 patch2 - Mar 2025

4

Automotive Service Solutions | MA-AS/PAD-PRM2 | 2025-03-11 © 2025 Bosch Automotive Service Solutions Inc. and affiliates. All rights reserved.

‒ 24.3 patch1 - Feb 2025 (c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

CDR – Past, Present & Future CDR Product Updates – Release Numbering Correction  Bosch changed the version numbering strategy of CDR software releases (starting in 2024)  Major revision reflects the year, the second revision is the number or releases for the year starting with ‘0’  Starting in 2024, CDR & CDR2 versions are determined by the following MV.VN.RRR:  The major version is the Year [MV]  The minor version [VN] is the count for the year, starting at 0 for the first release of the year  Patch revision [RRR] is the number build revisions of the software

 The word “Patch” was added to track the number of patches for the CDR versions posted on the website (i.e., CDR24.3.648Setup_Patch2.zip is a patch release for 24.3) 5

Automotive Service Solutions | MA-AS/PAD-PRM2 | 2025-03-11 © 2025 Bosch Automotive Service Solutions Inc. and affiliates. All rights reserved.

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

25.0.000 2025 year

Number of build Version No. revisions for 2025, starts with 0

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

CDR – Past, Present & Future CDR Product Updates  CANplus to CDR 900 migration  CDR CANplus can no longer be manufactured due to part shortages  The last of the CANplus modules were delivered early 2024 (no more available, due to end-of-life components)  CDR 900 is the main CDR interface  Bosch has migrated CANplus coverage to CDR 900 throughout 2024

6

Automotive Service Solutions | MA-AS/PAD-PRM2 | 2025-03-11 © 2025 Bosch Automotive Service Solutions Inc. and affiliates. All rights reserved.

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

CDR – Past, Present & Future Migration to CDR 900  CDR 24.1  FCA: Chrysler, Dodge, Jeep, SRT and RAM  Starting with MY2010 to current MY

 FCA: Alfa Romeo  Starting MY2015 through current MY

 FCA: Fiat

 CDR 24.2

 CDR 24.3

 FCA: Dodge & Lancia, pedestrian protection module (Europe) 2012 – 2017

 Nissan/Infiniti

 Starting MY2011 through current MY

 FCA: Lancia  Starting MY2012 through current MY

 Ford/Lincoln:  2009 through 2025

 Volkswagen (rebadged FCA mini van)  MY2010 ~ 2014 Routan 7

Automotive Service Solutions | MA-AS/PAD-PRM2 | 2025-03-11 © 2025 Bosch Automotive Service Solutions Inc. and affiliates. All rights reserved.

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

 Starting from MY 2021 through current MY

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

CDR – Past, Present & Future CDR Product Updates  CDR Cables released and available in 2024

8

Part Number

Description

Application

1699200984

Cable ID851, CDR Stellantis Driver Cam

Driver Camera Module cable for 2022+ Jeep Grand Cherokee, Grand Wagoneer, Wagoneer, 2025+ Dodge RAM 1500 vehicles

1699504347

Cable ID863, CDR Mazda ACM

ACM cable for AC2023 Mazda vehicles

1699503924

Cable ID860, CDR, BMW ACM

ACM cable for 2021+ BMW/MINI/Rolls-Royce vehicles equipped with ACM6

1699504348

Cable ID864, CDR, VWG ACM

ACM cable for 2023+ Audi vehicles

1699504297

Cable ID861, CDR VWG ACM

ACM cable for 2021+ Audi, Volkswagen vehicles

1699505288

Cable ID871, CDR Stellantis ACM

ACM cable for 2025+ RAM 1500 vehicles

1699504807

Cable, ID867, CDR Ford ACM

ACM cable for 2023+ Ford vehicles

1699504349

Cable ID856, CDR, GM, FCM1

Forward camera module cable for 2019+ GM vehicles

1699504350

Cable ID855, CDR, GM, ASCM 4

Active Safety Module for 2022+ GM vehicles

1699504809

Cable ID869, Volvo/Polestar ACM

ACM cable for 2024+ Volvo and Polestar vehicles

Automotive Service Solutions | MA-AS/PAD-PRM2 | 2025-03-11 © 2025 Bosch Automotive Service Solutions Inc. and affiliates. All rights reserved.

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

CDR – Past, Present & Future Notable Changes - 23.4 patch 1, Jan 2024  Cadillac, 2021 Escalade, FCM

 RAM, 2024 Promaster  Address a reported issue where data from Throttle Position in the Pre-Crash Graph does not match the data in the Pre-Crash table data.

 Mercedes-Benz, 2023 S Class  Added missing data elements in CDR report

 Mercedes-Benz, 2024 CLE

 General Motors, FCM

 Mazda, 2024 CX-90  Addressed an issue when performing a direct to module downloads with the CDR 900  Addressed an unsupported part number 9

 Chevrolet, 2024 Traverse  Addressed a download error

 Added missing VIN support

 Ford, 2024 F150

 Addressed an issue when the image export button is displayed for a system that does not record images and causes an error stating “no images to be saved”

 Fixed and issue when downloading an ASCM system downloads the FCM system instead

 BMW  ASCM6 EDID list 13 Specification updates and addressed data translation issues

Automotive Service Solutions | MA-AS/PAD-PRM2 | 2025-03-11 © 2025 Bosch Automotive Service Solutions Inc. and affiliates. All rights reserved.

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

CDR – Past, Present & Future Notable Changes  23.4 patch 1, Jan 2024 (con’t)

 23.4 patch 2, Mar 2024  EU market only - GM TVV (Type, Version, Variant)

 BMW  ASCM6 EDID list 13 Specification updates and addressed data translation issues

 Ford

 Added the following NA market vehicle coverage

‒ 2023 Expedition, addressed an issue when displaying Time from event 1 to 2 data element

 2025 MY Ford Bronco Sport, F-150, F-150 Lightning, F-250, 350, 450 & 550, 600 Super Duty, Maverick, and Mustang  2025 MY Lincoln Corsair and Nautilus

‒ Fixed an issue connecting to the internet via CDR application when retrieving TVV

‒ Fixed a download issue (part number not supported) on a 2024 Explorer Interceptor

 Acura ‒ Added support for MY2025 ADX to the help file

10

Automotive Service Solutions | MA-AS/PAD-PRM2 | 2025-03-11 © 2025 Bosch Automotive Service Solutions Inc. and affiliates. All rights reserved.

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

CDR – Past, Present & Future Notable Changes  VW Group Vehicles (Audi, Bentley, Lamborghini, Porsche, SKODA and Volkswagen)

 v24.0 release, Mar 2024  Added support for NA market  RAM (North America)

‒ Updated data limitations on various systems for EU and rest of world

‒ Added 2025 MY RAM 1500

 Subaru (Various including NA) ‒ 2025 MY BRZ, Crosstrek, Forester, Impreza, and Outback ‒ 2026 MY Crosstrek and Impreza

 Updated CDR 900 firmware, users should have updated their CDR 900s after installation of 24.0

 Volvo (Various Markets including NA) ‒ 2024 MY EX30 for Europe and China markets (CDR2)

 GM

 Updated minimum system requirements for installing and running the CDR software

‒ Added support for 2 new SDM-50 variants for MY 2023 ~ 2024 vehicles 11

Automotive Service Solutions | MA-AS/PAD-PRM2 | 2025-03-11 © 2025 Bosch Automotive Service Solutions Inc. and affiliates. All rights reserved.

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

CDR – Past, Present & Future CDR Product Updates – Notable Changes  v24.0 release, Mar 2024 (con’t)

 v24.0 patch 1, April 2024

 BMW

 CDR v24.0 included new software for the CDR 900 to address the following issues:

 Fixed a "Collect Data Failed! Bad or no response to for DID FA18.." error during an OBD download on 2019 and newer BMW ACSM6 ECUs  The error was caused by delays in responses from the ECU when requesting EDR data through the vehicle’s gateway  If all 6 events are recorded, the download can take up to 17 minutes to retrieve all events; a popup screen was added to inform the user of the 17 minute download time prior to starting the download.

12

 Bosch received complaints that the CDR tool was failing downloads when directly connecting to the module (D2M downloads)  It was discovered that a software component responsible for switching power to the ECU for D2M downloads was not ‘linked’ to the VCI firmware during the update process  After installing the patch (CDR v24.0.550), users should have updated their CDR 900 software

Automotive Service Solutions | MA-AS/PAD-PRM2 | 2025-03-11 © 2025 Bosch Automotive Service Solutions Inc. and affiliates. All rights reserved.

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

CDR – Past, Present & Future CDR Product Updates – Notable Changes  v24.0.1 patch 2, June 2024  Addressed the following issues:  Fixed an issue where various data elements and CDR report sections were missing for a MY2021 Lamborghini, Audi and Bentley vehicles  Corrected some Honda/Acura ECU location text in the help file

 For Honda / Acura EDR, changed enumeration for data elements "Cruise Control System" & "Adaptive Cruise Control System" from "On but Nonengaged“ to "On but Not-engaged".  Addressed an issue where CDR 900 was not able to download from a 2017 Chevrolet Tahoe  Added the following NA market support  Honda/Acura

 Added missing VIN support for MY2024 Chevrolet Colorado

‒ Added support for 2025 MY Integra, MDX, and ZDX ‒ Added support for 2025 MY CR-V, Pilot, and Prologue

 Polestar  For GM SDM50 systems, added missing Supplemental Event Records 13

Automotive Service Solutions | MA-AS/PAD-PRM2 | 2025-03-11 © 2025 Bosch Automotive Service Solutions Inc. and affiliates. All rights reserved.

‒ Added support for 2024 MY Polestar 3

 Volvo ‒ Added support for 2024 MY EX90

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

CDR – Past, Present & Future CDR Product Updates – Notable Changes  v24.1 release, July 2024  Added support for 2 new OEMs (JLR and Renault) and 7 more brands: ‒ CUPRA - VWG (EU & China markets)

 Added new coverage for North America market for supported OEM vehicles from MY2021 to 2026  Freightliner (North America Market)

‒ Dacia – Renault (EU market)

‒ MY2024 ~ 2025 Sprinter

‒ Jaguar / Landrover - JLR (China market) ‒ Mobilize – Renault (EU market)

 General Motors (North America Market)

‒ Renault (EU market)

‒ MY2025 Trailblazer and Trax and MY2024 Buick Envista

‒ SEAT – VWG (EU & China markets)

 Added CANplus back-model coverage to CDR 900 for Stellantis and Volkswagen vehicles

14

 Added support for 2 new General Motors Forward Camera Modules

 Honda Acura (North American Markets) ‒ MY2024 Honda WR-V, MY2025 Accord, Ridgeline, Odyssey, and Passport and MY2025 Acura TLX and RDX

Automotive Service Solutions | MA-AS/PAD-PRM2 | 2025-03-11 © 2025 Bosch Automotive Service Solutions Inc. and affiliates. All rights reserved.

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

CDR – Past, Present & Future CDR Product Updates – Notable Changes  Pagani

 v24.1 release, July 2024 (con’t)  Added support for…

‒ MY2018 ~ 2023 Huayra ‒ MY2023 Utopia

 Mercedes-Benz ‒ MY2025 S-Class, C-Class, EQS, EQE, SL, AMG GT, EQE SUV, EQS SUV, GLC, EClass, CLE, CLA, AMG GT 43/53/63, GWagon, GLA, EQA, A-Class, CLA, GLE, Sprinter, Vito, und V-Class

 Mazda ‒ MY2024 CX-60, CX-80, MX-30 ‒ MY2025 CX-30, CX-50, Mazda3

 BMW

 Nissan / Infiniti ‒ MY2024 Nissan AD, Altima, Ariya, Armada, Frontier, Juke, KICKS, Murano, NV200, NV350, Pathfinder, Rogue, Sentra, Titan, Versa, X-Trail, and Z

 Corrected steering polarity and updated data limitations on ASCM4i, ACSM5 and ACSM6 systems

‒ MY2024 Infiniti Q50, QX50, QX55, QX60, and QX80 15

Automotive Service Solutions | MA-AS/PAD-PRM2 | 2025-03-11 © 2025 Bosch Automotive Service Solutions Inc. and affiliates. All rights reserved.

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

CDR – Past, Present & Future CDR Product Updates – Notable Changes  Subaru:

 v24.1 release, July 2024 (con’t)  Volkswagen Group:  Updated data limitations files for various ECUs  For 2021 Bentley Continental, fixed an "Error 9: script out of range error" when imaging a Bentley vehicle  For 2018 Audi A6 help file. corrected CDR cable usage from ID 826 to use 804 cable w/o CDR500

16

 Added support for missing data elements in the CDR report for some late model Subaru coverage  Updated data limitations for various Subaru vehicles  Added “HEV communication error” in CDR report  Changed decimal precision for Longitudinal and Lateral Acceleration data elements

Automotive Service Solutions | MA-AS/PAD-PRM2 | 2025-03-11 © 2025 Bosch Automotive Service Solutions Inc. and affiliates. All rights reserved.

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

CDR – Past, Present & Future CDR Product Updates – Notable Changes  v24.1 release, July 2024 (con’t)

 Added support for the following vehicles:

 Addressed the following issues

 BMW/MINI and Rolls-Royce, added the following vehicle coverage (Various markets)

 GM: added missing VIN support for MY2023 Chevrolet Corvette  BMW: fixed BMW VIN support (BMW, MINI and Rolls-Royce) for various MY2021~MY2025 vehicles equipped with ACSM5 and ACSM6 airbag control modules  Nissan/Infiniti: for MY2025 and newer Nissan & Infinity vehicles for US market, added the following -20 to 0 second precrash data elements: ‒ Speed, vehicle indicated

MY2025 Mini Convertible, Hardtop, and Countryman

‒

MY2024 Rolls-Royce Cullinan, Ghost, Phantom, and Spectre

‒

MY2025 Rolls-Royce Cullinan, Ghost, Phantom, and Spectre

‒

MY2025 BMW 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 7, and 8 Series, i3, i4, i5, i7, iX, X1, X2, X3, X4, X5, X6, X7, XM , and Z4

 Chrysler, Dodge and Jeep vehicles, added VIN for the following

‒ Accelerator pedal, %full

‒

MY2025 Chrysler & RAM Pacifica/Voyager/Grand Caravan

‒ Service brake, on/off

‒

MY2025 RAM 1500 & RAM 1500-3500 ProMaster (including BEV) MY2025 RAM 3500 ProMaster BEV

‒

MY2024 & 2025 Dodge Durango

‒

MY2025 Jeep Compass

‒ Engine RPM ‒ Steering input

17

‒

Automotive Service Solutions | MA-AS/PAD-PRM2 | 2025-03-11 © 2025 Bosch Automotive Service Solutions Inc. and affiliates. All rights reserved.

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

CDR – Past, Present & Future CDR Product Updates – Notable Changes  Mitsubishi (con’t)

 v24.1 release, July 2024 (con’t)

 MY2024 Mitsubishi Delica Mini, eK Wagon, eK Space, L200, Outlander, Outlander PHEV, and Triton

 Mitsubishi, added the following vehicle coverage (Various markets)  MY2020 Mitsubishi eK Wagon and eK Space

 MY2025 Mitsubishi Delica Mini, eK Wagon, eK Space, L200, Minicab MiEV, Outlander, Outlander PHEV, and Triton

 MY2021 Mitsubishi eK Wagon and eK Space  MY2022 Mitsubishi eK Wagon and eK Space

 Nissan/Infiniti  Added support for MY2025 Infiniti QX55 (supported in CDR2 application)

 MY2023 Mitsubishi Delica Mini, eK Wagon, eK Space, Outlander PHEV 18

Automotive Service Solutions | MA-AS/PAD-PRM2 | 2025-03-11 © 2025 Bosch Automotive Service Solutions Inc. and affiliates. All rights reserved.

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

CDR – Past, Present & Future CDR Product Updates – Notable Changes  v24.1 patch 2, Aug 2024

 Content / System Changes ‒ For 2020 and newer Jeep Compass vehicles, added a delay during powering an ACM during a direct to module download.

 Addressed the CDR2 application issue  Fixed an issue with the CDR2 application which occurs on some Windows platforms causing errors (such as Could Not Start Diagnostic Engine and Error while generating a report) when opening a CDRnx file or doing downloads.

‒ Added missing VIN support for MY2018 Holden Equinox ‒ For GM Active Safety Systems, added support for various module IDs. ‒ Added missing VIN support for 2018 BMW 3 series ‒ Changed ACM module support for 2021 BMW X3 M Competition from an ACSM4i to ACSM5

 Content / System Changes  Addressed several issues with CANplus-to-CDR 900 migration support for Chrysler/Dodge/Jeep/RAM systems.  Added a pop-up window for GM FCM downloads in the case when there are no available images to save

 Added new vehicle support for the following Stellantis vehicles: ‒ MY2025 Alfa Romeo Giulia, Stelvio and Tonale ‒ MY2025 Jeep Grand Cherokee ‒ MY2024 Jeep Wagoneer S ‒ MY2024 Dodge Hornet and Charger

19

Automotive Service Solutions | MA-AS/PAD-PRM2 | 2025-03-11 © 2025 Bosch Automotive Service Solutions Inc. and affiliates. All rights reserved.

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

CDR – Past, Present & Future CDR Product Updates – Notable Changes  Added new CANplus back-model coverage for CDR 900

 Honda/Acura: MY2026 rebadged GM vehicles, Acura ZDX and Honda Prologue (modules include SDM-50 and OCS)

‒ Ford (2009 through 2025) and Chrysler PPM (EU) module support for Lancia and Dodge (MY2012 through 2017)

 Added the following NA market coverage

 v24.2 release, Oct 2024

 Ford/Lincoln (NA Market) ‒ 2025 MY Ford Econoline, Explorer, F-650, and F750

 Newly added support:  Ford: EU/NA market, MY2025 vehicles

‒ 2025 MY Lincoln Aviator

 General Motors: MY2026 vehicles and FCM module support for MY2024 through 2025 vehicles

 General Motors (NA Market) ‒ Added 2026 MY AVGM Origin AV ‒ Added 2026 MY Brightdrop ZEVO ‒ Added 2026 MY Buick Electra E5, Enclave, Encore GX, Envision, and Envista

20

Automotive Service Solutions | MA-AS/PAD-PRM2 | 2025-03-11 © 2025 Bosch Automotive Service Solutions Inc. and affiliates. All rights reserved.

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

CDR – Past, Present & Future CDR Product Updates – Notable Changes  Added International trucks: 2019 - 2026 MY International CV Series

 v24.2 release, Oct 2024  Added the following NA market vehicle coverage (con’t)

 Honda/Acura (NA Market)

 GM: Added 2026 MY ‒ Cadillac Celestiq, CT4, CT5, Escalade, Escalade IQ, Escalade IQ, ESV, LYRIQ, OPTIQ, VISTIQ, XT4, and XT5

 Added 2026 MY Acura ZDX  Added 2026 MY Honda Prologue

‒ Added 2026 MY Chevrolet Blazer EV, Bolt EUV, Colorado, Corvette, Equinox, Equinox EV, Express, Silverado, Suburban Limited, Tahoe, Trailblazer, Traverse, and TRAX ‒ Added 2026 MY GMC Acadia, Canyon, Hummer EV, Savana, Sierra, Sierra EV, Sierra HD, Terrain, and Yukon

21

Automotive Service Solutions | MA-AS/PAD-PRM2 | 2025-03-11 © 2025 Bosch Automotive Service Solutions Inc. and affiliates. All rights reserved.

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

CDR – Past, Present & Future CDR Product Updates – Notable Changes  Added the following vehicle support

 v24.2 release, Oct 2024 (con’t)

 2024 - 2025 BMW vehicle support

 Added new General Motors Forward Camera Module  2025 MY Buick Electra E5  2025 MY Cadillac Celestiq, CT5, Escalade, Escalade IQ, LYRIQ, and OPTIQ  2025 MY Chevrolet Blazer EV, Colorado, Corvette, Equinox EV, Silverado, Suburban, and Tahoe  2025 MY GMC Canyon, Sierra, Sierra EV, and Yukon  2024 MY Buick Electra E5  2024 MY Cadillac Celestiq and LYRIQ  2024 MY Chevrolet Blazer EV, Colorado, Corvette, and Equinox EV  2024 MY GMC Canyon 22

‒ 2024 m2 Series Active Tourer, 5 Series, 7 Series, i5, i7, iX, X5, X6, X7 and XM ‒ 2025 1 Series, 2 Series Active Tourer, 2 Series Gran Coupe, 5 Series, 7 Series, i5, i7, iX, X3, X5, X6 and X7, XM

 2024~ 2025 MINI vehicle support ‒ Aceman, Convertible, Countryman, Hardtop ‒ 2024~2025 Rolls-Royce: Spectre

 2025 Oshkosh: NGDV

Automotive Service Solutions | MA-AS/PAD-PRM2 | 2025-03-11 © 2025 Bosch Automotive Service Solutions Inc. and affiliates. All rights reserved.

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

CDR – Past, Present & Future CDR Product Updates – Notable Changes  v24.2 release, Oct 2024 (con’t)  Addressed the following issues ‒ Legacy CDR: error opening a BMW CDR file from an ACSM6, after the file was saved by the user ‒ Legacy CDR: VW60, Pre-Crash time column reporting "0.0" sec for all time stamps ‒ Legacy CDR: VWG vehicles, do not display EDIDs 441 and 442 in the CDR report for EDID list v0005 and v0008 ‒ Legacy CDR: BMW i4 (ASCM6), cannot save a CDR file after being downloaded, CDR displays Error Line: 706 Disk Error -- Error number: 6 Overflow ‒ Ford RC8C: Events are not recorded 24.2 ‒ BMW: when downloading ACM6 ECUs, error “Software ID is not supported: BMW 13” ‒ VW Group: VW60, displaying the incorrect Data Limitations ‒ Ford: added 2025 Bronco VIN Support ‒ BMW: fixed 2025 X5 ACM not supported ‒ GM FCM B: (Sys Ref 1003), added a new controller ID ‒ VW Group: fixed an issue in VW60 CDR report displaying (Invalid, Unknown EDID) ‒ GM ASCM: (sys ref #1013), added new controller IDs ‒ Ford: 2024 F-150 XLT displaying that the vehicle is not supported message 23

Automotive Service Solutions | MA-AS/PAD-PRM2 | 2025-03-11 © 2025 Bosch Automotive Service Solutions Inc. and affiliates. All rights reserved.

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

CDR – Past, Present & Future CDR Product Updates – Notable Changes  v24.3 release, Dec 2024  Updated MY coverage for Lucid Air for US and added support for Air vehicles in EU

 For CDR2, added EDR readout support for GM’s Occupant Classification Sensor (OCS) on supported brands since 2020 (automated occupant detection system) 

OCS is OBD Download only, will be direct to module when the cable becomes available

 New GM Active Safety Systems added:  1 new FCM system were added  2 new ASCM systems were added  Updated help file for the following vehicles with ASM/FCM support:  Added Front Camera support for: 2024 - 2025 MY Cadillac XT4  Added ASCM Support for: 2025 - 2026 MY Chevrolet Silverado, 2025 MY GMC Hummer EV and 2025 2026 MY GMC Sierra  ASCM support was also added to 2024 - 2026 Acura ZDX vehicles which utilizes GM’s platform 24

Automotive Service Solutions | MA-AS/PAD-PRM2 | 2025-03-11 © 2025 Bosch Automotive Service Solutions Inc. and affiliates. All rights reserved.

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

CDR – Past, Present & Future GM Vehicles that support OCS EDR data  2020 MY Cadillac CT4 and CT52020 MY Chevrolet Corvette  2021 MY Buick Envision

 2024 MY Chevrolet Blazer EV, Colorado, Corvette, Equinox EV, Silverado, Suburban, Traverse, and Tahoe

 2021 MY Cadillac CT4, CT5, and Escalade

 2024 MY GMC Acadia, Canyon, Hummer EV, Sierra, and Yukon

 2021 MY Chevrolet Corvette, Suburban, and Tahoe

 2025 MY Buick Enclave, Envision, and Electra E5

 2021 MY GMC Yukon2022 MY Buick Envision

 2025 MY Cadillac CT4, CT5, CELESTIQ, LYRIQ, XT4, Escalade, Escalade IQ, VISTIQ, OPTIQ, and XT5

 2022 MY Cadillac CT4, CT5, and Escalade  2022 MY Chevrolet Corvette, Silverado, Suburban, and Tahoe  2022 MY GMC Hummer EV, Sierra, and Yukon

 2025 MY Chevrolet Blazer EV, Colorado, Corvette, Equinox, Equinox EV, Silverado, Suburban, Traverse, and Tahoe

 2023 MY Buick Envision

 2025 MY GMC Acadia, Canyon, Hummer EV, Sierra, Terrain, and Yukon

 2023 MY Cadillac CT4, CT5, LYRIQ, and Escalade

 2026 MY Buick Enclave, Envision, and Electra E5

 2023 MY Chevrolet Colorado, Corvette, Silverado, Suburban, and  2026 MY Cadillac CT4, CT5, CELESTIQ, LYRIQ, XT4, Escalade, Escalade IQ, VISTIQ, OPTIQ, and XT5 Tahoe  2024 MY Buick Envision

 2026 MY Chevrolet Blazer EV, Bolt EUV, Colorado, Corvette, Equinox, Equinox EV, Silverado, Suburban, Traverse, and Tahoe

 2024 MY Cadillac CT4, CT5, CELESTIQ, LYRIQ, XT4, and Escalade

 2026 MY GMC Acadia, Canyon, Hummer EV, Sierra, Terrain, and Yukon

 2023 MY GMC Canyon, Hummer EV, Sierra, and Yukon

25

Automotive Service Solutions | MA-AS/PAD-PRM2 | 2025-03-11 © 2025 Bosch Automotive Service Solutions Inc. and affiliates. All rights reserved.

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

CDR – Past, Present & Future CDR Product Updates – Notable Changes  v24.3 release, Dec 2024 (con’t)

 Ferrari

 Migration of Nissan/Infiniti vehicles from CANplus to CDR 900  Added the following NA market coverage  Ford ‒ 2025 MY Ford Bronco Sport, F-150, F-150 Lightning, F-250, 350, 450 & 550, 600 Super Duty, Maverick, and Mustang



2024 MY Ferrari 12Cilindri and 12Cilindri Spider



2025 MY Ferrari 12Cilindri, 12Cilindri Spider, 296 GTB, 296 GTS, 812 Competizione, 812 GTS, F8 Tributo, F8 Tributo Spider, Portofino M, Purosangue, Roma, Roma Spider, SF90 Spider, SF90 Stradale, SF90 XX Spider, and SF90 XX Stradale

 Honda/Acura 

MY2026 Honda Fit, Jazz, Passport & Civic



MY2025 Honda Civic

 Lucid (US/CA & Europe Market)

‒ 2025 MY Lincoln Corsair and Nautilus



MY 2022 - 2025 Lucid Air for US market

‒ 2025 MY Ford Econoline, Explorer, F-650, and F7501 new FCM system were added



MY 2025 Lucid Air for Europe market

‒ 2025 MY Lincoln Aviator 26

Automotive Service Solutions | MA-AS/PAD-PRM2 | 2025-03-11 © 2025 Bosch Automotive Service Solutions Inc. and affiliates. All rights reserved.

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

CDR – Past, Present & Future CDR Product Updates – Notable Changes  v24.3 release, Dec 2024 (con’t)

 Ferrari

 Migration of Nissan/Infiniti vehicles from CANplus to CDR 900  Added the following NA market coverage  Ford ‒ 2025 MY Ford Bronco Sport, F-150, F-150 Lightning, F-250, 350, 450 & 550, 600 Super Duty, Maverick, and Mustang



2024 MY Ferrari 12Cilindri and 12Cilindri Spider



2025 MY Ferrari 12Cilindri, 12Cilindri Spider, 296 GTB, 296 GTS, 812 Competizione, 812 GTS, F8 Tributo, F8 Tributo Spider, Portofino M, Purosangue, Roma, Roma Spider, SF90 Spider, SF90 Stradale, SF90 XX Spider, and SF90 XX Stradale

 Honda/Acura 

MY2026 Honda Fit, Jazz, Passport & Civic



MY2025 Honda Civic

 Lucid (US/CA & Europe Market)

‒ 2025 MY Lincoln Corsair and Nautilus



MY 2022 - 2025 Lucid Air for US market

‒ 2025 MY Ford Econoline, Explorer, F-650, and F7501 new FCM system were added



MY 2025 Lucid Air for Europe market

‒ 2025 MY Lincoln Aviator 27

Automotive Service Solutions | MA-AS/PAD-PRM2 | 2025-03-11 © 2025 Bosch Automotive Service Solutions Inc. and affiliates. All rights reserved.

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

CDR – Past, Present & Future CDR Product Updates – Notable Changes  v24.3 release, Dec 2024 (continued)  Mitsubishi  Added MY 2023 - 2025 Mitsubishi Eclipse Cross, Eclipse Cross PHEV, and Xpander  Added MY 2022 - 2025 Mitsubishi Delica D:5

 Nissan/Infiniti  MY 2022 Infiniti QX60  MY 2023 Nissan Sakua, Serena, Sylphy, and X-Trail  MY 2024 Nissan Dayz, Qashqai, Roox, Sakura, Serena, Sylphy, and Titan XD  MY 2025 Nissan Armada, Kicks, Z, Murano, Sylphy, and Leaf  MY 2025 Infiniti QX80 28

Automotive Service Solutions | MA-AS/PAD-PRM2 | 2025-03-11 © 2025 Bosch Automotive Service Solutions Inc. and affiliates. All rights reserved.

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

CDR – Past, Present & Future CDR Product Updates – Notable Changes  v24.3 patch 1, Feb 2024  Addressed the following issues  BMW: Corrected steering input polarity for ACSM4i systems  Chevrolet: 2024 Traverse Limited: added unsupported VIN and corrected cable ID  Cadillac: 2021 Escalade and 2024 Chevrolet Traverse, FCMs: fixed error 13 displayed when exporting images from FCM CDR files.

 Toyota, 2024 Tacoma: addressed an issue where some Toyota CDR reports do not display all the recorded events ‒ IMPORTANT: if this issue is encountered, users will need to re-download the EDR data from the ECU

 RAM, 2024 Promaster: address a reported issue where data from Throttle Position in the Pre-Crash Graph does not match the data in the Pre-Crash table data

 Ford, 2017 Transit: addressed an issue with CDR 900 downloads where events are not displayed in the report but are displayed in CANplus report 29

Automotive Service Solutions | MA-AS/PAD-PRM2 | 2025-03-11 © 2025 Bosch Automotive Service Solutions Inc. and affiliates. All rights reserved.

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

CDR – Past, Present & Future CDR Product Updates – Notable Changes  v24.3 patch 1, Feb 2024 (con’t)  Addressed the following issues  BMW: Corrected steering input polarity for ACSM4i systems  Chevrolet: 2024 Traverse Limited: added unsupported VIN and corrected cable ID  Cadillac: 2021 Escalade and 2024 Chevrolet Traverse, FCMs: fixed error 13 displayed when exporting images from FCM CDR files.  Ford, 2017 Transit: addressed an issue with CDR 900 downloads where events are not displayed in the report but are displayed in CANplus report 30

 Toyota, 2024 Tacoma: addressed an issue where some Toyota CDR reports do not display all the recorded events ‒ IMPORTANT: if this issue is encountered, users will need to re-download the EDR data from the ECU

 RAM, 2024 Promaster: address a reported issue where data from Throttle Position in the Pre-Crash Graph does not match the data in the Pre-Crash table data

 Mercedes-Benz, 2024 CLE: added missing VIN support

Automotive Service Solutions | MA-AS/PAD-PRM2 | 2025-03-11 © 2025 Bosch Automotive Service Solutions Inc. and affiliates. All rights reserved.

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

CDR – Past, Present & Future CDR Product Updates – Notable Changes  v24.3 patch 1, Feb 2024 (con’t)

 GM

 Addressed the following issues  Mazda, 2024 CX-90: addressed an issue when performing a direct to module downloads with the CDR 900  Ford, 2024 F150: addressed an unsupported part number  Mercedes-Benz, 2023 S Class: added missing data elements in CDR report BMW: ASCM6 EDID list 13 Specification updates and addressed data translation issues  Acura: added support for MY2025 ADX to the help file 31

 Cadillac, 2021 Escalade, FCM: addressed an issue when the image export button is displayed for a system that does not record images and causes an error stating “no images to be saved”  Chevrolet, 2024 Traverse: addressed a download error  FCM: fixed and issue when downloading an ASCM system downloads the FCM system instead  EU market only - GM TVV: fixed an issue connecting to the internet via CDR application when retrieving TVV

 Ford  2023 Expedition, addressed an issue when displaying Time from event 1 to 2 data element  Fixed a download issue (part number not supported) on a 2024 Explorer Interceptor

Automotive Service Solutions | MA-AS/PAD-PRM2 | 2025-03-11 © 2025 Bosch Automotive Service Solutions Inc. and affiliates. All rights reserved.

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

CDR – Past, Present & Future What’s Coming – CDR2 & Legacy Integration  CDR 25.0 (planned April release) notable changes coming:  In 25.0 release (April) , CDR software activation will be done in one place, within the CDR2 application ‒ Currently activation is done one for the legacy program and then separately for the CDR2 program t ‒ The change will make for one activation effective for both

 The CDR Legacy application log file location is changed to C:\ProgramData\Bosch\CrashDataRetrieval\logs

32

Automotive Service Solutions | MA-AS/PAD-PRM2 | 2025-03-11 © 2025 Bosch Automotive Service Solutions Inc. and affiliates. All rights reserved.

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

CDR – Past, Present & Future What’s Coming – CDR2 & Legacy Integration  CDR 25.1 (planned August release) notable changes coming:  Integration of CDR help file information into the new CDR2 application will begin and will be an iterative process, users will see the older CDR help file becoming being migrated to CDR2  All CDR2 supported vehicles will be called out in the CDR2 application and no longer in the CDR legacy application help file ‒ Example of Oshkosh coverage starting in 25.1:

33

Automotive Service Solutions | MA-AS/PAD-PRM2 | 2025-03-11 © 2025 Bosch Automotive Service Solutions Inc. and affiliates. All rights reserved.

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

CDR – Past, Present & Future What’s Coming – New CDR Cables  The following CDR (9) cables are planned for release in 2025, starting end of 2Q/2025 through end of year  ID865, CDR Toyota ACM 11  ID870, GM ASCM 5 (HC)  ID881, CDR GM AOS (OCS system)  ID871, CDR Stellantis ACM  ID882, CDR Volvo ACM (SPA3)  ID883, CDR Stellantis ACM  ID885, CDR Stellantis JT/JL  ID884, CDR Lucid ACM (Gravity)  ID886, CDR BMW ACM

34

Automotive Service Solutions | MA-AS/PAD-PRM2 | 2025-03-11 © 2025 Bosch Automotive Service Solutions Inc. and affiliates. All rights reserved.

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

CDR – Past, Present & Future What’s Coming – CANplus to CDR 900  Bosch can no longer manufacture CANplus modules since 3Q 2023 due to end-of-life electronic components  Work is in progress to migrate select OEM and Vehicle Coverage to CDR 900 starting with MY2010 and newer vehicles  To date, the following systems have been released in 2024:  FCA, Ford and Nissan systems

 Planned for 2025 is  Mazda systems  GM SDM10 – SDM40 systems

 Migration of CANplus to CDR 900 completion is planned for end of year, 2025 35

Automotive Service Solutions | MA-AS/PAD-PRM2 | 2025-03-11 © 2025 Bosch Automotive Service Solutions Inc. and affiliates. All rights reserved.

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

CDR – Past, Present & Future What’s Coming – “One-CDR” Project  Second phase of the CDR2 application development is to integrate the Legacy CDR application with CDR2  CDR legacy will be running as a service to the CDR2 (SaaS)  This allows the user to launch only one CDR application and when the use of the legacy software is required, CDR2 will call CDR legacy software services to tightly integrate both applications

 Converge content of the CDR Help File’s “Vehicle and Cable Lookup” data directly into the CDR2 software application  Project has started and the plan is to finish in 2026

36

Automotive Service Solutions | MA-AS/PAD-PRM2 | 2025-03-11 © 2025 Bosch Automotive Service Solutions Inc. and affiliates. All rights reserved.

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

CDR – Past, Present & Future CDR2 Refresher Slides  Released July 13, 2023 in CDR v23.3  Bundled release, includes CDR (Legacy) and CDR2 (NextGen)  CDR2 application is a brand-new application  new user interface  vehicles year/make/model selection  vehicle information stored in the CDR report

 Utilizes the CDR 900 and CDR 500 (FlexRay adapter)  CDR legacy app is used to determine CDR2 application support, simply click on CDR2 and the app will open  Initial vehicles supported in CDR2:  US market: ‒ 2024 Mazda CX-30, CX-5, CX-50, CX-70, Mazda3 and MX-5 ‒ 2023~2024 Mercedes ADAS system on certain EQS and S-Class vehicles 37

Automotive Service Solutions | MA-AS/PAD-PRM2 | 2025-03-11 © 2025 Bosch Automotive Service Solutions Inc. and affiliates. All rights reserved.

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

CDR – Past, Present & Future CDR NextGen Software Launch CDR Legacy application

Vehicle requires CDR2 Click CDR2

38

Automotive Service Solutions | MA-AS/PAD-PRM2 | 2025-03-11 © 2025 Bosch Automotive Service Solutions Inc. and affiliates. All rights reserved.

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

CDR – Past, Present & Future CDR NextGen Software CDR2 landing page is launched Select year, make and model, then enter the VIN Enter case info and comments

39

Automotive Service Solutions | MA-AS/PAD-PRM2 | 2025-03-11 © 2025 Bosch Automotive Service Solutions Inc. and affiliates. All rights reserved.

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

CDR – Past, Present & Future CDR NextGen Software Click a module to download

CDR tool starts the download, runs 3 passes and saves the file as a .CDRnx file extension utilizing the same naming convention as legacy CDR

40

Automotive Service Solutions | MA-AS/PAD-PRM2 | 2025-03-11 © 2025 Bosch Automotive Service Solutions Inc. and affiliates. All rights reserved.

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Bosch CDR DLC Tool Kit

The Bosch CDR DLC Tool Kit contains all hardware required to perform a DLC/OBD retrieval of EDR data supported by the Bosch CDR 900 VCI as stated in the Bosch CDR Help File. This package also includes a 1-year Bosch CDR software license.

The Bosch CDR DLC Tool Kit currently supports the largest number of vehicle manufacturers in North America.

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

SAE Committee update on the status of 49CFR563 & other related EDR James Bielenda – SAE EDR Committee Chairperson

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

41

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

James Bielenda • BSEE University of Michigan (1979) • Chrysler Defense – M1 Tank EE Engineer (79-82) • American Motors - Powertrain Electronics (82-87) • Chrysler Corporation - Powertrain Elect. (87-98) • DaimlerChrysler – Chassis Electronics (98-05) • DaimlerChrysler – Legal/EDR (05-08) • FCA Legal/EDR/Functional Safety (08-21) • SAE EDR Committee (05-present), Chairman • Expert Witness – Safety/Electronic Systems (2022 -) March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

42

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

March 10-12, 2025

SAE EDR Committee SAE Committee update on the status of 49CFR563 & other related EDR

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

43

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

SAE EDR Committee • Established in 2003 • Roster contains 98 people with expertise in: – Vehicle Manufacturing (13 different companies) – Airbag Control Module Design (7 different companies) – Accident Reconstruction (13 individuals) – Research (8 individuals) – EDR Tool Manufacturer (1 individual) – Liaison (9 individuals) – SAE Staff (9 individuals) – Legal (2 individuals) • Over half of committee voting members have been participating for 13+ yrs.

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

44

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

SAE J1698 - Event Data Recorder • J1698 first published 12-15-2003 - Established a common Report format • Revised 02/2005 – Added J1698-2 Data Extraction, J1698-3 Compliance Testing • Revised 05/2014 – Updated in areas to reflect NHTSA 49CFR563 • Revised 03/2017 – Incorporate Information from J1698-1 • Revised 05/2018 – Updated for Automated Driving System (ADS), Pedestrian Protection • Revised 3/2023 – Added more Safety Systems (Blind Spot, Lane Keep, etc.) and coordinating with ADS (J3197) March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

45

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

SAE J1698 - Event Data Recorder • The committee came up with a Minimum Subset of enumerations for any new Safety & Customer Convenience Systems • System ON or OFF • System Faulted (Diagnostic Trouble Code) • System Engaged, Non-engaged • Warning

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

46

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

March 10-12, 2025

49CFR563 Event Data Recorders SAE Committee update on the status of 49CFR563 & other related EDR

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

47

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

49CFR563 Event Data Recorders NHTSA Highlights • First published 08-28-2006, for vehicles manufactured after Sept 1, 2012. Does not mandate EDRs on vehicles, but is instead an “if equipped” standard applying only to light vehicles required to have frontal air bags that a manufacturer chooses to voluntarily equip with an EDR. • NPRM (Notice of Proposed Rulemaking – NHTSA-2022-0021) 06/22/2022

• Proposal to extend recording time from 5 seconds pre-crash data at 2 Hz to 20 seconds of precrash data at a frequency of 10 Hz. In response to the Fixing America’s Surface Transportation Act (FAST Act). All based off the commissioned VT Study with no other input from any other sources.

• Final Rule – (NHTSA-2024-0084) – December 18, 2024 with a Effective date of 1/17/2025. Compliance date of Sept. 1, 2027. No Phase-in allowed.

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

48

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

49CFR563 Event Data Recorders How did we get here?

• Based on the passage of the FAST Act, NHTSA commissioned Virginia Tech University (VT) to do a study on what should be the proper recording time to provide sufficient information to investigate the cause of motor vehicle crashes.

• The FAST Act further provides that, within two years of submitting this report to Congress, NHTSA “shall produce regulations to establish the appropriate period that should be recorded”.

• Note: The FAST Act expired on September 30, 2021

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

49

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Virginia Tech Study What did the VT Study find?

• The analysis of driver pre-crash maneuvers in NASS-CDS crashes showed that the current 5 seconds of recording time failed to capture all driver pre-crash maneuver initiations in rear-end, intersection as well as road departure crashes in the following areas: 35% in braking, 64-88% of steering and 5-9% of Accelerator release.

• In analysis of vehicle traversal time, the result showed that in approximately 13% of the sample intersection crashes, the driver entered the intersection more than 5 seconds prior to impact. In road departure crashes the 5 second recording time was sufficient.

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

50

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Virginia Tech Study What did the VT Study find?

• Based on naturalistic driving studies (NDS), the 100 car NDS and the Second Strategic Highway Research Program (SHRP-2) showed that the current 5 second EDR recording duration was not sufficient to capture all driver precrash maneuvers.

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

51

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Virginia Tech Study Duration of Driver Action (seconds) 50th Percentile 90th Percentile

Driver Pre-crash Maneuver Rear-End: Time to Closest Approach

4.5

12.3

Intersection: Approach + Traversal

12.6

18.6

Road Departure: Drift out of lane to Recovery

3.2

6.0

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

52

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Virginia Tech Study What did the VT Study Recommend?

• The study findings suggest that an EDR recording duration of 20 seconds would adequately capture driver pre-crash inputs to the vehicle, i.e. braking, steering and acceleration in rear crashes, intersection crashes and road departures.

Strange how the wording changed in the study from Driver Behavior to Driver Actions.

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

53

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

49CFR563 Event Data Recorders VT responded with a final report to NHTSA on September of 2017.

NHTSA submitted the Study to Congress in August of 2018.

SAE responds to NHTSA on VT Study with a presentation and submission in July of 2020.

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

54

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

March 10-12, 2025

SAE EDR Committee Response to NHTSA on VT Study SAE Committee update on the status of 49CFR563 & other related EDR

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

55

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

SAE Response to NHTSA on VT Study

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

56

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

SAE Response to NHTSA on VT Study 1. Out of all of the recorded data elements, the study only considered three: Speed, Braking and Steering 2. The vehicles analyzed in the study lacked modern safety features 3. The authors made a number of flawed assumptions with data elements 4. The authors stated they purposely ignored EDR data recorded more than 5 seconds prior to a crash 5. The recording frequency of the data from the older vehicles used was at a much slower sampling rate

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

57

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

SAE Response to NHTSA on VT Study 1. Out of all of the recorded data elements, the study only considered three - Speed, Braking, Steering, when there were 3 to 5 times that amount representing (8 to 14 data elements depending on the vehicle CDR Report being used).

•

These elements were not studied inclusive to each other nor with the other EDR data elements, as proper crash data analysis should always be done.

They (Data Elements) should always be used in conjunction with one another. Good accident reconstruction involves looking at the “Accident Scene” as well as using the stored EDR data elements to fully understand the causation. Using only the EDR Data can lead to many false conclusions in an accident investigation.

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

58

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

SAE Response to NHTSA on VT Study • Vehicle speed data must be used, in conjunction with the service brake status, to determine if the driver was actually applying enough brake pedal pressure to attempt to slow the vehicle.

• Additionally recorded values such as percent throttle, percent accelerator pedal, engine rpm, cruise control, ABS, lateral acceleration, yaw rate, all can be very useful when studying crash causation.

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

59

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Five Issues with the data used in the Virginia Tech Study Lacked modern safety features 2. The vehicles analyzed in the study lacked modern safety features If vehicles equipped with active safety features such as precollision braking and electronic stability control had been used in the study:

Current EDR - 5 sec: Active Safety Activation 35 mph

214.80 ft

Braking

• Some of these accidents would have been avoided and

therefore not been included in the study

139.61 ft

• These features would have initiated well within the current

5 second duration

SAE INTERNATIONAL

March 10-12, 2025

-5s

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

(35 to 10 mph) 75.19 ft

35 mph

-0s

6060

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

SAE Response to NHTSA on VT Study 3. The authors made a number of flawed assumptions (for example): • “Service Brake” may not be attributable to brake force applied to slow the vehicle •

A Crash reconstructionist will use other vehicle data in conjunction with brake switch information to determine if braking force is actually occurring and to what extent, again using data elements together.

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

61

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

SAE Response to NHTSA on VT Study • Two false assumptions made were relative to the steering input •

•

A Weighted distribution was used to draw conclusions from such a small sample size that can skew the data. A High percentage (64% to 88% depending on crash type scenario) of cases failed to record the steering maneuver initiation within 5 seconds but this could have been a much smaller percentage if the actual sample size of vehicles used in the study was larger.

If there was no steering input change recorded in the EDR, the conclusion was the driver was not moving the steering wheel at all (+/- 16 degrees before change shows)

• No distinction was made between accelerator pedal position data and engine throttle position data. These are two very different data elements.

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

62

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

SAE Response to NHTSA on VT Study 4. The authors stated they purposely ignored EDR data recorded more than 5 seconds prior to a crash • If the authors had reviewed the 8 seconds of pre-crash data that was available in some of the vehicles in the study, they would have been able to: Confirm if Service Brake “on” at -5 seconds, really means the brakes had been applied at or prior to -5 seconds rather than assuming they were. Looking at the 8 seconds of data could have been used to help prove their theory that more data was actually beneficial.

• Demonstrate if that pre-crash data beyond 5 seconds, would have changed the overall accident reconstruction results, thus indicating a need for additional per-crash recording time or not.

•

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

63

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

SAE Response to NHTSA on VT Study 5. The recording frequency of the data from the older vehicles used was at a much slower sample rate • 1 hertz versus the 2 hertz frequency of the data stored in Part 563 vehicles • Data sampled once per second vs. twice per second • Brake pedal application can occur several times within a time span of one second or even in a half of a second, especially if the driver is pumping the brakes • The authors may have missed state changes within the sample window using the 1 Hertz or assumed that capturing more than 5 seconds of pre-crash data would show the driver not braking.

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

64

Intersection Accident Scenario

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

35 mph panic brake to 10 mph accident

Current EDR - 5 sec: Active Safety Activation

What real benefit does this additional 15 seconds of data give us?

35 mph

214.80 ft

Braking

Proposed EDR - 20 sec:

(35 to 10 mph)

984.75 ft

728.10 ft

471.45 ft

139.61 ft

35 mph

35 mph

35 mph

35 mph

-5s

-0s

-20s

-15s

SAE INTERNATIONAL

March 10-12, 2025

-10s

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

75.19 ft

6565

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

SAE Response to NHTSA on VT Study Ramifications of 20 sec storage that the Virginia Tech Study did not consider: 1. Increased energy reserve required in the module that stores the EDR 2. Increased memory size of the buffer and non-volatile storage device 3. Microprocessor changes in the module that stores the EDR 4. Increased module size for packaging the aforementioned components

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

66

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

SAE Response to NHTSA on VT Study 5. Module packaging location(s) constraints 6. Increased module(s) cost 7. Increased validation testing of the EDR and the systems that provide data 8. Increased EDR downloading time requiring an external power supply to power the vehicle Overall cost, weight and physical packaging changes have serious ramifications with no tangible benefit to determining crash causation.

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

67

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

SAE Response to NHTSA on VT Study • The Committee believes the Virginia Tech Study did not show how increased recording

durations for pre-crash vehicle data would improve crash reconstruction or provide any benefit to better understand the crash scenario.

• Having 20 seconds of pre-crash data is likely to become a privacy issue as this relates to

driver behavior and not accident causation. It might also lead to false assumptions of driver actions way before the impact.

• Until real world event data justifies increasing EDR recording duration, we strongly

recommend leaving it at its current 5 second duration.

• Stay consistent with SAE J1698 and NHTSA Part 563

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

68

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

49CFR563 Event Data Recorders • Congress did not act upon the report and NHTSA did not regulate per the FAST Act requiring a 2 year Final Ruling (Sept 1, 2020) • NPRM (Notice of Proposed Rulemaking – NHTSA-2022-0021) 06/22/2022.

NHTSA receives 21 Comments from OEMs, various organizations etc., Most thought implementation timing was a concern • Final Rule – (NHTSA-2024-0084) – December 18, 2024 with a Effective date of 1/17/2025. Compliance date of Sept. 1, 2027.

• SAE responded to NHTSA with a petition of Reconsideration on 2/3/2025.

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

69

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

What exactly are the Final Rule changes?

• These seven (7) data elements are required to be recorded at 10Hz for 20 seconds • Compliance Dates • Sept. 1, 2027 (Most Vehicles) • Sept. 1, 2029 (Small volume Manuf.)

• Sept. 1, 2030 (Altered vehicles)

• Vehicle Manufactures Interpretation: Only these seven (7) data elements are required to be recorded at 10 Hz for 20 secs.

March 10-12, 2025

Table I • Speed, Vehicle Indicated • Engine Throttle; % • Service Brake; On/Off Table II (If recorded) • Engine RPM • ABS Activity; engaged/non-engaged • Stability Control; On/Off/Engaged • Steering Input

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

70

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

49CFR563 Event Data Recorders NHTSA compromises based on comments received on NPRM • Lead Time – Originally a one year implementation has changed to a 2 year.

September 1, 2027 • No compelling reason for a phase-in plan • NHTSA restates the “voluntary nature of part 563”, and Manufacture’s remain free to decide if their vehicles will have EDR based on their own considerations.

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

71

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

SAE EDR Committee SAE EDR Committee Petition for Reconsideration 2/2025 • Resubmission of 7/2020 Presentation and submission materials to NHTSA & OMB • Response to NHTSA NPRM comments • Change of Recording time & frequency – not intended to be a monitor of driver behavior or a gage of driver fitness • Violation of separation of collision reconstruction from driver behavior record as an invasion of privacy • Recording duration is way beyond the driver’s reaction to the crash environment March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

72

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

SAE EDR Committee • Implementation timing

• Requires Software & Hardware changes • This requires a full development Program • Full Development programs are 3-4 years • Requires a Phase-In plan for older vehicle architectures • Requires all Manufacturers to make changes which drives Bosch CDR Tool changes for each Manufacturer.

NHTSA response: Turn-off EDR, it’s a Voluntary Regulation This is not a viable alternative

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

73

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

SAE EDR Committee • NHTSA’s Research of Cost Analysis • NHTSAs suggestion of deletion of Table II Data Elements to save space for the additional recording time and frequency of the seven (7) Data elements is detrimental to crash analysis. OEMs recorded data elements are not based on a “good to have”, but rather are based on many years of crash reconstruction and product investigations experience.

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

74

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

SAE EDR Committee NHTSA’s Research of Cost Analysis • SAE questions the pricing quotes given by NHTSA for individual components (capacitors, memory chips, etc.,) from the suggested consumer electronic distribution warehouses like Digi-Key. • OEMs only purchase their components from qualified suppliers that meet their stringent environmental and performance specifications.

• NHTSA estimated costs to be $.87-2.20 per vehicle, with no allotted development costs, that over 10 years would be a total cost of $33,520,000.

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

75

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

SAE EDR Committee NHTSA’s Research of Cost Analysis

• SAE supplied an Anonymous inquiry of the Auto manufacturers for estimation of costs: Average of responses for each OEM • Development/testing of $8.4 million for each OEM • Module cost increase of $5.40 • Using 16.4 million vehicles (17 OEMs) • 1st year cost burden $231.36 Million • Annual Cost burden $88.56 Million • Over 10 years - $1 Billion

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

76

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

SAE EDR Committee • Final Rule Requires new CDR Tool Development

• NHTSA did not take this into consideration • Can CDR be ready in 2 years for all makes/models (currently 22 OEMs, 69 Brands)

• NHTSA stated, this final rule does not change the voluntary nature of part 563, and manufacturers remain free to decide if their vehicle will have EDR functionality based on their own considerations.

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

77

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

SAE EDR Committee • NHTSA also stated: Although the system that activates air bags in a vehicle may share resources with the EDR functionality, we emphasize that the performance of systems that deploy air bags (e.g., supplemental restraint system) to mitigate injuries in a crash should not be negatively affected in order to develop an EDR that meets today’s new requirements.

Many OEMs have said that meeting the new requirements is a timing issue and especially on carryover vehicle architectures they will have to turn off EDR in those vehicle applications.

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

78

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

49CFR563 Event Data Recorders • Trump administration has put a hold on any New Regulations, going back 6 months from him taking office • Final Rule effectivity date of 1/17/2025, 3 days before a new Administration takes over …

(Thank You President Biden), is it on Hold?

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

79

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

March 10-12, 2025

China EDR SAE Committee update on the status of 49CFR563 & other related EDR

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

80

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

China EDR • In December 2020, China published GB39732-2020. Vehicle Event Data Recorder System, requiring passenger cars be equipped with EDR starting on January 1, 2022 for new Type Approvals. Note: They did not have test facilities identified or ready for testing.

• Combined SAE J1698 & 49 CFR Part 563 from a Definitions and Data Elements perspective • 60 Potential Data Elements Identified, Classified as A, B. • A = Must be Recorded (17 Data Elements) • B = If equipped, must be recorded (43 Data Elements)

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

81

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

China EDR • Unlock Conditions - Unique Triggers

• Longitudinal or Lateral velocity of 8km/h within a 150ms interval (Same as NHTSA) • Change in Vehicle velocity of that equals or exceeds 8km/h. Non Air Bag Vehicle.

• Lock Conditions

• Irreversible restraint deployment OR • The Vehicle Velocity change in longitudinal axis direction equals or exceeds 25km/h within 150ms interval (For their non air bag delivery vehicles)

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

82

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

China EDR • Record at least 3 crash events (Part 563 call out 2 events).

• China Identifies the EDR Retrieval Tool Protocol, which does not meet ISO standards.

• Crash Data Storage – China specifies where each data element is stored in memory.

Thus allowing for any tool manufacturer. Restricts OEMs to follow exactly the China GB. • Publishing the Memory Map brings into question, how secure is the data?

Note: Some OEMs have both China EDR and Part 563 EDR Data Elements stored in two separate locations. (2 EDRs) March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

83

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

China EDR • No additional Memory IDs available/Identified for Manufacturer specified data elements.

• OEMs stated they would validate only one (1) tool. Yet to know how that is going to workout if there is a Tool Manufacturer that has an error in their code.

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

84

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

China EDR Compliance Testing Three test types defined:

• High speed vehicle crash test (Delta V, acceleration, squib deployment information, seat belt status)

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

85

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

China EDR Compliance Testing • Low speed vehicle crash test (System status)

• Crash Simulation test (Shaker test)

• EDR trigger threshold • Event Locked condition • Autarky test: EDR shall record data from T0-5s to T0+150ms with the impact that deploys within 150ms after Loss Of Battery.

Clipping Flag – Compliance testing states that if acceleration data clips, it’s a failure of the test.

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

86

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

March 10-12, 2025

EU/UK EDR – UN R160 SAE Committee update on the status of 49CFR563 & other related EDR

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

87

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

EU/UK EDR – UN R160 The European Union’s (EU) General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) EU Privacy Law – May 25, 2018 VIN – Used by the CDR Retrieval Tool as a key element in determining EDR Report Data Elements and Format.

VIN Minus the last 4 of the sequence number

TVV – Type, Variant, Version (not to be confused with the Thermal Vacuum Valve) March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

88

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

EU/UK EDR – UN R160 TVV – Type, Variant, Version • The TVV is assigned to vehicles by the manufacturer in order to group them according to a common type (e.g. design and assembly of the essential parts of the body structure), variant (e.g. type of energy supply), and version (e.g. maximum laden mass, engine capacity, CO2 emissions).

• This also can be used for the identification of Safety Systems on the Vehicle.

Which can be used by the CDR Tool to determine which systems are “equipped”

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

89

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

EDR tool with multi-OEM Type, Variant, Version (TVV) interface EDR tool user

EDR tool supplier development requirement

1 -

OEM EDR data (serial port) UN ECE R160 data set no TVV (Type, Variant, Version)

-

OEM VIN data (serial port) Other ECU

EDR retrieval tool

User laptop + EDR tool software

EDR Event report -

2 OEM EDR module UN ECE R160 data set no TVV (Type, Variant, Version)

-

EDR retrieval tool

User laptop + EDR tool software functionality Manual input VIN (available today) Automatic search VIN (available today) Manual input TVV (new development) Automated input TVV (new development)

User laptop + EDR tool software

VIN

VIN On vehicle or vehicle documents

4 -

EDR event report UN ECE R160 data set VIN without last 4 digit TVV

TVV

EDR tool multi-OEM TVV interface

3 -

-

User laptop + EDR tool software

(New)

VIN

TVV

OEM1 TVV dBase

TVV On vehicle documents OEM website?

(Existing functionality) March 10-12, 2025

VIN

TVV

OEM 2 TVV dBase

VIN

TVV

OEM 3 TVV dBase

User laptop + EDR tool software (New functionality) (c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

90

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

EU/UK EDR – UN R160 • Phase I – R160.0 Initial release (3/2021), very similar to Part 563 in relation to recorded data elements affects vehicle built after July 6, 2022 • Phase II – R160.01 release (3/2022) New Type Approval vehicles July, 2024, all vehicle July, 2026 added R157 Automated Driving Data Elements, Emergency Call, etc.

• Phase III - R160.02 New Triggers, Data Elements, VRU March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

91

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

EU/UK EDR – UN R160 • Phase III – UN R160.02 (also referred to EDR Step 2)

• New Triggers – Safety System activation, Last Stop, Jerk

• Blind Spot Monitoring – System Status, Warning, Haptic • Emergency Stop – Fixed deceleration • Reversing Motion – VRU detection system • Roll Over March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

92

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

EU/UK EDR – UN R160 • Phase III – UN R160.02 (also referred to EDR Step 2) • AEB - Advance Emergency Braking • VRU - Vulnerable road user • Advanced Driver Distraction Warning • Rear Automatic Braking • Direction Indicator Switch – (Turn Signal) March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

93

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

March 10-12, 2025

EU/UK EDR – UN R169 HD Truck EDR SAE Committee update on the status of 49CFR563 & other related EDR

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

94

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

EU/UK EDR – UN R169 HD Truck EDR • This Regulation applies to the approval of vehicles of categories M2, M3, N2 and N3, with regard to their Event Data Recorders (EDRs).

• Adopted June, 2024 • The following data elements are excluded from the scope: Vehicle Identification Number (VIN), associated vehicle details, location/positioning data, information on the driver, and date and time of an event.

(EU) General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR)

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

95

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

EU/UK EDR – UN R169 HD Truck EDR Conditions for triggering recording of data An event shall be recorded by the EDR if one of the following threshold values is met or exceeded.

• Sudden Deceleration: Vehicle speed changes at a rate higher than 3.25 m/s2 and the change persists beyond that threshold for at least 0.7 seconds.

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

96

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

EU/UK EDR – UN R169 HD Truck EDR • Last Stop: Trigger shall be activated if any of the following applies: (a) Vehicle speed is reported as 0 km/h for 20 s. (b) While vehicle speed is reported as 0 km/h, and (i) parking brake system is applied, or (ii) vehicle master control switch is deactivated.

Re-activation of last stop trigger due to threshold criterion (a) shall be disabled if the vehicle speed is not reported as 24 km/h or more for a minimum of 6 s.

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

97

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

EU/UK EDR – UN R169 HD Truck EDR System (if fitted) Supplemental Restraint System Antilock Braking System Advanced Emergency Braking (including pedestrian/ cyclist if equipped) Vehicle Stability Function

March 10-12, 2025

Trigger Deployment Command of a Supplemental Restraint System System Intervention Emergency Brake Intervention System Intervention

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

98

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

PREMIUM SUMMIT SPONSOR

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Title of the presentation Author name(s) and affiliation(s)

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Artificial Intelligence 101 Jason Kuter

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

99

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Jason Kuter • Degree in Environmental and Forest Biology 2000 • Certified Teacher 2001 • 39 years of programming experience • 26 Years of IT experience in applications and

infrastructure • 10 years of multiple youth sports coaching and boards • 10 years of scouting leadership (Eagle 1992) • 2 years experience as a Select Board Member in MA • Tech evangelist, user, developer, and strategist • Experienced mentor, speaker, and decision maker • Wife, four kids, and a dog • Makes a pretty decent pot of coffee

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

100

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Agenda for Today's Presentation • Introduction to AI • How far has AI Come • How AI Works • The Benefits of AI • Ethical Challenges of AI • Legal and Societal Implications • The Future of AI

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

101

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

What Is Artificial Intelligence?

Simulation of Human Intelligence AI simulates human intelligence, allowing machines to perform cognitive tasks such as learning and reasoning.

Learning and Reasoning AI systems can learn from data and make decisions, which involves reasoning and problem-solving capabilities.

Technological Foundations AI encompasses various technologies, including algorithms and neural networks that drive intelligent behavior in machines.

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

102

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Key Areas Where AI Is Transforming Society Healthcare Innovations AI is transforming healthcare by assisting in accurate diagnosis and personalized treatment options, ultimately improving patient outcomes.

Finance and Fraud Detection In finance, AI algorithms are now essential for detecting fraud, enhancing security, and streamlining transactions.

Autonomous Transportation AI development in transportation includes autonomous vehicles, promising safer and more efficient travel across urban environments.

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

103

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Machine Learning Vs. Deep Learning Understanding Machine Learning Machine learning enables systems to learn from data without needing explicit programming, enhancing decision-making and automation.

Deep Learning Explained Deep learning utilizes neural networks to analyze large datasets, excelling in tasks like image and speech recognition.

Applications of Deep Learning Deep learning is particularly effective for pattern recognition in complex data, impacting various industries and technologies.

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

104

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

AI Applications in Everyday Life (Healthcare, Finance, Automation) AI in Healthcare

AI algorithms analyze medical data to provide improved diagnostics and personalized treatment options for patients.

AI in Finance

In finance, AI is used to develop algorithms for trading, risk assessment, and fraud detection, making processes more efficient.

AI in Automation

AI enhances productivity across various industries by automating tasks, reducing human error, and streamlining workflows.

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

105

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Increased Efficiency and Automation Automation of Mundane Tasks AI technology automates repetitive tasks, freeing up human resources to tackle more complex challenges and innovate.

Speeding Up Processes The integration of AI accelerates operational processes, leading to quicker turnaround times and improved service delivery.

Cost Reduction and Productivity By automating tasks, companies can significantly lower costs while simultaneously boosting overall productivity across various sectors.

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

106

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Enhanced Decision-Making and Predictive Capabilities Data Analysis for Insights AI systems excel at analyzing large datasets, offering insights that support informed decisionmaking processes in various industries.

Market Predictions Businesses leverage AI technologies for accurate market predictions, enabling them to strategize and plan effectively.

Healthcare Management In healthcare, AI assists professionals in managing patient data, leading to improved outcomes and personalized care.

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

107

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

AI’s Role in Scientific Advancements Faster Data Analysis AI significantly speeds up data analysis, allowing researchers to process vast amounts of information quickly and efficiently.

Accelerating Discoveries In genomics and climate science, AI accelerates breakthroughs, facilitating faster scientific discoveries and innovations.

Indispensable Research Tool AI has become an essential tool for modern researchers, transforming the landscape of scientific exploration and experimentation.

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

108

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Bias in AI Algorithms Understanding AI Bias AI algorithms can reflect and amplify biases found in their training data, affecting decision-making processes.

Impact of Bias Unaddressed bias in AI can lead to unfair and discriminatory outcomes, impacting various sectors and populations.

Addressing the Issue It is essential to identify and mitigate biases in AI systems to ensure fairness and equity for all users.

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

109

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Privacy Concerns and Surveillance Issues AI in Surveillance

The use of AI in surveillance technology has grown rapidly, leading to increased capabilities but also heightened privacy risks.

Privacy Rights Risks

As AI systems analyze personal data, there is a significant risk of infringing on individual privacy rights and freedoms.

Data Protection Measures

To address these concerns, robust data protection measures are necessary to safeguard personal information from misuse.

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

110

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

The Risk of Misinformation and AI-Generated Content Misinformation Challenges AI-generated content can spread misinformation quickly, making it difficult to verify the truth of information.

Deepfakes and Authenticity Deepfakes created by AI can manipulate reality, challenging the authenticity of video and audio content.

Impact on Public Trust As AI blurs the line between real and fake, public trust in media and online information is jeopardized.

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

111

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

AI in Employment and Job Displacement Job Displacement Risks The automation capabilities of AI can lead to significant job displacement across different sectors, particularly in manual and repetitive tasks.

Economic Impacts The economic impacts of job displacement due to AI automation can affect income levels and employment rates across the economy.

Workforce Transition Strategies It's crucial to explore strategies for workforce transition, including upskilling and reskilling programs to prepare workers for new job roles.

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

112

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Regulation and Governance of AI Technologies Evolving Regulatory Frameworks As AI technologies advance, regulatory frameworks must adapt to address new challenges and opportunities.

Ethical Guidelines for AI Establishing clear ethical guidelines is crucial for ensuring responsible AI deployment and maintaining public trust.

Responsible AI Deployment Policies must focus on responsible AI deployment to mitigate risks and enhance societal benefits.

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

113

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

The Responsibility of AI Developers and Users

Ethical Deployment AI developers and users must ensure the ethical deployment of AI technologies to prevent misuse and harm.

Transparency Prioritizing transparency in AI systems helps build user trust and enhances the understanding of AI decisions.

Accountability Both developers and users must be accountable for their actions regarding the deployment and use of AI technologies.

Fairness Ensuring fairness in AI applications is crucial for safeguarding societal interests and preventing bias.

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

114

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Trends in AI Development Natural Language Processing Advancements in natural language processing enhance how machines understand and respond to human language, making interactions more intuitive.

AI Ethics As AI becomes more prevalent, ethical considerations are crucial to ensure responsible development and deployment of AI systems.

Industry Integration AI is increasingly integrated into various industries, from healthcare to finance, enhancing efficiency and innovation in processes.

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

115

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

How Society Can Prepare for an AI-Driven World Investment in Education Investing in education is crucial for equipping individuals with skills to thrive in an AI-driven job market.

Promoting Digital Literacy Promoting digital literacy ensures that individuals understand and can effectively interact with AI technologies.

Responsible AI Policies Developing policies that encourage responsible AI use is essential for maximizing AI's benefits and minimizing risks.

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

116

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Conclusion Opportunities of AI

Challenges of AI

Navigating Implications

Harnessing AI for Society

AI offers transformative opportunities in various fields, enhancing productivity and creativity in innovative ways.

Despite its potential, AI also poses significant challenges, including ethical dilemmas and potential job displacement.

Navigating the ethical, legal, and societal implications of AI is crucial for its responsible adoption and use.

By addressing these challenges, we can harness AI's potential for the betterment of society and improve lives.

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

117

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Access and Retrieval of Rivian EDR Data Mike Stogsdill J.S. Held, LLC

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

118

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Mike Stogsdill • ACTAR - 2268 • Retired Law Enforcement 18+ years • CDR Technician Trainer/Mentor • Currently Employed with JS Held, LLC.

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Senior Accident Reconstructionist

119

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

March 10-12, 2025

Introduction Access and Retrieval of Rivian EDR Data

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

120

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Rivian R1S and R1T

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

121

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Subject Rivian

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

122

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Code of Federal Regulations §563.3 – Application • This part applies to the following vehicles manufactured on or after September 1, 2012, if they are equipped with an event data recorder: passenger cars, multipurpose passenger vehicles, trucks, and buses with a GVWR of 3,855 kg (8,500 pounds) or less and an unloaded vehicle weight of 2,495 kg (5,500 pounds) or less, ….

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

123

123

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Code of Federal Regulations §563.12 – Data retrieval tools

• Each manufacturer of a motor vehicle equipped with an EDR shall ensure by licensing agreement or other means that a tool(s) is commercially available that is capable of accessing and retrieving the data stored in the EDR that are required by this part. The tool(s) shall be commercially available not later than 90 days after the first sale of the motor vehicle for purposes other than resale.

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

124

124

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Owner’s Manual

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

125

125

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Owner’s Manual

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

126

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Gear Guard

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

127

127

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

• Drive Cam clip video icon • Incident video icon • Motion Cam video icon March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

128

128

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Incident Recording

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

129

129

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Saving Videos from the HDD

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

130

130

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

March 10-12, 2025

1

Front camera

5

Front Surround view camera

11

Rear Surround view camera

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

131

131

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

• 3 surround view camera

1 fender camera

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

132

132

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

133

133

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Communications

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

134

134

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

March 10-12, 2025

Subject Rivian R1S Access and Retrieval of Rivian EDR Data

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

135

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

2023 Rivian R1S

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

136

136

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

2023 Rivian R1S – PolyCam scan

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

137

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

2023 Rivian R1S

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

138

138

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

2023 Rivian R1S

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

139

139

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

March 10-12, 2025

Acquisition of EDR Data Access and Retrieval of Rivian EDR Data

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

140

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Connection via OBD/DLC

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

141

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

12V Power – Under the hood.

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

142

142

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

2023 Rivian R1S

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

143

143

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

2023 Rivian R1S

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

144

144

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Power

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

145

145

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Odometer Reading

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

146

146

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Vehicle Settings

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

147

147

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Vehicle Settings

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

148

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Vehicle Settings

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

149

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Data and Privacy

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

150

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Data and Privacy

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

151

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Data and Privacy

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

152

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Data and Privacy

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

153

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Gear Guard

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

154

154

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Drive Cam

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

155

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Incidents

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

156

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Incident Viewing In-Car

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

157

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

158

158

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Preparing Drive

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

159

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Prepare Drive

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

160

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Incident Videos

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

161

161

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Motion Cam

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

162

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Starred Videos

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

163

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

March 10-12, 2025

Rivian EDR Data Access and Retrieval of Rivian EDR Data

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

165

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

166

166

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

47 Page PDF document • No Graphs • No Charts • No Tables

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

167

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

168

168

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Report Categories • Front Collision 1 • Front Collision 2 • Side Collision 1 • Side Collision 2 • Rollover 1 • Rollover 2

March 10-12, 2025

• No Graphs • No Charts • No conversions

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

169

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Front Collision 1 and Front Collision 2 • X Direction Delta – V (km/h)

• 250 ms • X Direction Delta – V max • X Direction Delta – V max time (ms)

• Y Direction Delta – V (km/h)

• 250 ms • Y Direction Delta – V max • Y Direction Delta – V max time (ms)

• Vehicle Speed (km/h)

• 5 seconds pre-crash •

0.5 second resolution

• Accelerator Opening Ratio • 5 seconds pre-crash •

0.5 second resolution

March 10-12, 2025

• Brake On/Off • Ignition cycles at collision and download • Seatbelt status • Driver • Passenger

• Airbag warning lamp status • Driver and passenger airbag stage 1 • Multi Event number • ABS Operation Status • Stability Control • Rudder (Steering Wheel) Angle

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

170

170

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Side Collision 1 and Side Collision 2 • X Direction Delta – V (km/h)

• 250 ms • X Direction Delta – V max • X Direction Delta – V max time (ms)

• Y Direction Delta – V (km/h)

• 250 ms • Y Direction Delta – V max • Y Direction Delta – V max time (ms)

• Vehicle Speed (km/h)

• 5 seconds pre-crash •

0.5 second resolution

• Accelerator Opening Ratio • 5 seconds pre-crash •

0.5 second resolution

March 10-12, 2025

• Brake On/Off • Ignition cycles at collision and download • Seatbelt status • Driver • Passenger

• Airbag warning lamp status • Driver and passenger airbag stage 1 • Multi Event number • ABS Operation Status • Stability Control • Rudder (Steering Wheel) Angle

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

171

171

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Rollover 1 and Rollover 2 • X Direction Delta – V (km/h)

• 250 ms • X Direction Delta – V max • X Direction Delta – V max time (ms)

• Y Direction Delta – V (km/h)

• 250 ms • Y Direction Delta – V max • Y Direction Delta – V max time (ms)

• Vehicle Speed (km/h)

• 5 seconds pre-crash •

0.5 second resolution

• Accelerator Opening Ratio • 5 seconds pre-crash •

0.5 second resolution

March 10-12, 2025

• Brake On/Off • Ignition cycles at collision and download • Seatbelt status • Driver • Passenger

• Airbag warning lamp status • Driver and passenger airbag stage 1 • Multi Event number • ABS Operation Status • Stability Control • Rudder (Steering Wheel) Angle

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

172

172

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Additional Event Data • IG-ON time: 28828 ms (28.82 Seconds) • Record Order – 1 times • Loss of IGN Power Supply During Running: No • Driver Knee Air Bag Deployment Time: 17 ms • Driver 2nd Row Retractor Pretensioner Deployment Time: 17 ms • Passenger 2nd Row Retractor Pretensioner Deployment Time: 17 ms March 10-12, 2025

• Driver Air Bag Stage 1: 17 ms • Driver Air Bag Stage 2 Deployment Time: 22 ms • Driver Seat Belt Condition: Fastened • Number of IG-ON Cycles (At Time of Collision): 1579 cycles • Number of IG-ON Cycles (On Download): 1585 cycles • File Recording Completion Status: Yes

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

173

173

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Pre-Crash Time (s) Speed (kp/h) Speed (mph) Brake Accelerator

ABS Front

ABS Rear

Stability Control Rudder Angle

-5

103

64.0

Off

0%

Not Operating

Not Operating

On

0

-4.5

103

64.0

Off

0%

Not Operating

Not Operating

On

0

-4

103

64.0

Off

0%

Not Operating

Not Operating

On

0

-3.5

103

64.0

Off

0%

Not Operating

Not Operating

On

0

-3

103

64.0

Off

0%

Not Operating

Not Operating

On

0

-2.5

99

61.5

On

0%

Not Operating

Not Operating

On

0

-2

86

53.4

On

6%

Not Operating

Not Operating

On

5

-1.5

78

48.5

On

0%

Not Operating

Not Operating

On

25

-1

67

41.6

On

0%

Operating

Operating

On

140

-0.5

58

36.0

On

0%

Operating

Operating

On

230

0

53

32.9

On

0%

Operating

Operating

Engaged

240

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

174

174

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

EDR Crash Data Time X Direction Delta - V (Event + 0.0ms): 0 km/h X Direction Delta - V (Event + 10.0ms): 3 km/h X Direction Delta - V (Event + 20.0ms): 8 km/h X Direction Delta - V (Event + 30.0ms): 17 km/h X Direction Delta - V (Event + 40.0ms): 29 km/h X Direction Delta - V (Event + 50.0ms): 33 km/h X Direction Delta - V (Event + 60.0ms): 40 km/h X Direction Delta - V (Event + 70.0ms): 45 km/h X Direction Delta - V (Event + 80.0ms): 49 km/h X Direction Delta - V (Event + 90.0ms): 51 km/h X Direction Delta - V (Event + 100.0ms): 53 km/h X Direction Delta - V (Event + 110.0ms): 55 km/h X Direction Delta - V (Event + 120.0ms): 55 km/h X Direction Delta - V (Event + 130.0ms): 56 km/h X Direction Delta - V (Event + 140.0ms): 56 km/h X Direction Delta - V (Event + 150.0ms): 57 km/h X Direction Delta - V (Event + 160.0ms): 57 km/h X Direction Delta - V (Event + 170.0ms): 57 km/h X Direction Delta - V (Event + 180.0ms): 57 km/h X Direction Delta - V (Event + 190.0ms): 0 km/h X Direction Delta - V (Event + 200.0ms): 0 km/h X Direction Delta - V (Event + 210.0ms): 0 km/h X Direction Delta - V (Event + 220.0ms): 0 km/h X Direction Delta - V (Event + 230.0ms): 0 km/h X Direction Delta - V (Event + 240.0ms): 0 km/h X Direction Delta - V (Event + 250.0ms): 0 km/h

March 10-12, 2025

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 160 170 180 190 200 210 220 230 240 250

Delta-V kph Delta-V mph 0 -3 -8 -17 -29 -33 -40 -45 -49 -51 -53 -55 -55 -56 -56 -57 -57 -57 -57 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

0.0 -1.9 -5.0 -10.6 -18.0 -20.5 -24.9 -28.0 -30.5 -31.7 -32.9 -34.2 -34.2 -34.8 -34.8 -35.4 -35.4 -35.4 -35.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Time Y Direction Delta - V (Event + 0.0ms): 0 km/h Y Direction Delta - V (Event + 10.0ms): 0 km/h Y Direction Delta - V (Event + 20.0ms): 0 km/h Y Direction Delta - V (Event + 30.0ms): 0 km/h Y Direction Delta - V (Event + 40.0ms): 0 km/h Y Direction Delta - V (Event + 50.0ms): 1 km/h Y Direction Delta - V (Event + 60.0ms): 2 km/h Y Direction Delta - V (Event + 70.0ms): 3 km/h Y Direction Delta - V (Event + 80.0ms): 4 km/h Y Direction Delta - V (Event + 90.0ms): 3 km/h Y Direction Delta - V (Event + 100.0ms): 3 km/h Y Direction Delta - V (Event + 110.0ms): 2 km/h Y Direction Delta - V (Event + 120.0ms): 1 km/h Y Direction Delta - V (Event + 130.0ms): 0 km/h Y Direction Delta - V (Event + 140.0ms): 0 km/h Y Direction Delta - V (Event + 150.0ms): 0 km/h Y Direction Delta - V (Event + 160.0ms): 0 km/h Y Direction Delta - V (Event + 170.0ms): 0 km/h Y Direction Delta - V (Event + 180.0ms): 0 km/h Y Direction Delta - V (Event + 190.0ms): 0 km/h Y Direction Delta - V (Event + 200.0ms): 0 km/h Y Direction Delta - V (Event + 210.0ms): 0 km/h Y Direction Delta - V (Event + 220.0ms): 0 km/h Y Direction Delta - V (Event + 230.0ms): 0 km/h Y Direction Delta - V (Event + 240.0ms): 0 km/h Y Direction Delta - V (Event + 250.0ms): 0 km/h

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 160 170 180 190 200 210 220 230 240 250

Delta-V km/h Delta-V mph 0 0 0 0 0 1 2 3 4 3 3 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.6 1.2 1.9 2.5 1.9 1.9 1.2 0.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

175

175

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

EDR Crash Data Chart Title 0

0

20

40

60

4.5

80 100 120 140 160 180 200 220 240

-10

Lateral Delta V

4 3.5 3

-20

2.5 -30

2 1.5

-40

1 -50

0.5 0

-60 Delta-V kph

March 10-12, 2025

Delta-V mph

0

20

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

40

60

80 100 120 140 160 180 200 220 240 Delta-V km/h Delta-V mph

176

176

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

March 10-12, 2025

IIHS Crash Testing – Rivian R1S Access and Retrieval of Rivian EDR Data

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

177

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

IIHS Crash Test - 2023 Rivian R1S (CEF2314)

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

178

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

IIHS Crash Test - 2023 Rivian R1S (CEF2314)

40 mph

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

179

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

IIHS Crash Test - 2023 Rivian R1S (CEF2314)

40 mph

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

180

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

IIHS Crash Test - 2023 Rivian R1S (CEF2314) compared to subject crash vehicle

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

181

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

The Crash

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

182

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

2021 Toyota Highlander vs. 2023 Rivian R1S

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

183

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Specifications • Highlander

• Curb weight 4653 lbs.

• 54 % front • 46 % rear

Rivian R1S

Canadian Vehicles Specifications 6982 lbs.

6878 lbs.

7295 lbs.

IIHS Crash Test - 2023 Rivian R1S (CEF2314)

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

184

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Pre-Crash Time (s) Speed (kp/h) Speed (mph) Brake Accelerator

ABS Front

ABS Rear

Stability Control Rudder Angle

-5

103

64.0

Off

0%

Not Operating

Not Operating

On

0

-4.5

103

64.0

Off

0%

Not Operating

Not Operating

On

0

-4

103

64.0

Off

0%

Not Operating

Not Operating

On

0

-3.5

103

64.0

Off

0%

Not Operating

Not Operating

On

0

-3

103

64.0

Off

0%

Not Operating

Not Operating

On

0

-2.5

99

61.5

On

0%

Not Operating

Not Operating

On

0

-2

86

53.4

On

6%

Not Operating

Not Operating

On

5

-1.5

78

48.5

On

0%

Not Operating

Not Operating

On

25

-1

67

41.6

On

0%

Operating

Operating

On

140

-0.5

58

36.0

On

0%

Operating

Operating

On

230

0

53

32.9

On

0%

Operating

Operating

Engaged

240

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

185

185

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Longitudinal Delta-V X Direction Delta - V (Event + 0.0ms): 0 km/h X Direction Delta - V (Event + 10.0ms): 3 km/h X Direction Delta - V (Event + 20.0ms): 8 km/h X Direction Delta - V (Event + 30.0ms): 17 km/h X Direction Delta - V (Event + 40.0ms): 29 km/h X Direction Delta - V (Event + 50.0ms): 33 km/h X Direction Delta - V (Event + 60.0ms): 40 km/h X Direction Delta - V (Event + 70.0ms): 45 km/h X Direction Delta - V (Event + 80.0ms): 49 km/h X Direction Delta - V (Event + 90.0ms): 51 km/h X Direction Delta - V (Event + 100.0ms): 53 km/h X Direction Delta - V (Event + 110.0ms): 55 km/h X Direction Delta - V (Event + 120.0ms): 55 km/h X Direction Delta - V (Event + 130.0ms): 56 km/h X Direction Delta - V (Event + 140.0ms): 56 km/h X Direction Delta - V (Event + 150.0ms): 57 km/h X Direction Delta - V (Event + 160.0ms): 57 km/h X Direction Delta - V (Event + 170.0ms): 57 km/h X Direction Delta - V (Event + 180.0ms): 57 km/h X Direction Delta - V (Event + 190.0ms): 0 km/h X Direction Delta - V (Event + 200.0ms): 0 km/h X Direction Delta - V (Event + 210.0ms): 0 km/h X Direction Delta - V (Event + 220.0ms): 0 km/h X Direction Delta - V (Event + 230.0ms): 0 km/h X Direction Delta - V (Event + 240.0ms): 0 km/h X Direction Delta - V (Event + 250.0ms): 0 km/h

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 160 170 180 190 200 210 220 230 240 250

March 10-12, 2025

Delta-V kph Delta-V mph 0 -3 -8 -17 -29 -33 -40 -45 -49 -51 -53 -55 -55 -56 -56 -57 -57 -57 -57 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

0.0 -1.9 -5.0 -10.6 -18.0 -20.5 -24.9 -28.0 -30.5 -31.7 -32.9 -34.2 -34.2 -34.8 -34.8 -35.4 -35.4 -35.4 -35.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Chart Title 0 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 160 170 180 190 200 210 220 230 240 250

Time

-10

-20

-30

-40

-50

-60

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Delta-V kph

Delta-V mph

186

186

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Lateral Delta-V Y Direction Delta - V (Event + 0.0ms): 0 km/h Y Direction Delta - V (Event + 10.0ms): 0 km/h Y Direction Delta - V (Event + 20.0ms): 0 km/h Y Direction Delta - V (Event + 30.0ms): 0 km/h Y Direction Delta - V (Event + 40.0ms): 0 km/h Y Direction Delta - V (Event + 50.0ms): 1 km/h Y Direction Delta - V (Event + 60.0ms): 2 km/h Y Direction Delta - V (Event + 70.0ms): 3 km/h Y Direction Delta - V (Event + 80.0ms): 4 km/h Y Direction Delta - V (Event + 90.0ms): 3 km/h Y Direction Delta - V (Event + 100.0ms): 3 km/h Y Direction Delta - V (Event + 110.0ms): 2 km/h Y Direction Delta - V (Event + 120.0ms): 1 km/h Y Direction Delta - V (Event + 130.0ms): 0 km/h Y Direction Delta - V (Event + 140.0ms): 0 km/h Y Direction Delta - V (Event + 150.0ms): 0 km/h Y Direction Delta - V (Event + 160.0ms): 0 km/h Y Direction Delta - V (Event + 170.0ms): 0 km/h Y Direction Delta - V (Event + 180.0ms): 0 km/h Y Direction Delta - V (Event + 190.0ms): 0 km/h Y Direction Delta - V (Event + 200.0ms): 0 km/h Y Direction Delta - V (Event + 210.0ms): 0 km/h Y Direction Delta - V (Event + 220.0ms): 0 km/h Y Direction Delta - V (Event + 230.0ms): 0 km/h Y Direction Delta - V (Event + 240.0ms): 0 km/h Y Direction Delta - V (Event + 250.0ms): 0 km/h

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 160 170 180 190 200 210 220 230 240 250

March 10-12, 2025

Delta-V km/h Delta-V mph 0 0 0 0 0 1 2 3 4 3 3 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.6 1.2 1.9 2.5 1.9 1.9 1.2 0.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Lateral Delta V 4.5 4 3.5 3 2.5 2 1.5 1 0.5 0 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 160 170 180 190 200 210 220 230 240 250

Time

Delta-V km/h

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Delta-V mph

187

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

https://rivian.com/legal/lawenforcement-data-requestguidelines

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

188

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

https://rivian.com/legal/lawenforcement-data-requestguidelines

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

189

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

LERT Portal

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

190

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

https://rivian.com/legal/ civil-service-of-processand-third-party-datarequests

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

191

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

https://rivian.com/legal/ civil-service-of-processand-third-party-datarequests

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

192

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Contact

Mike Stogsdill J.S. Held, LLC mike.stogsdill@jsheld.com 719-414-7438

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

193

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Title of the presentation Author name(s) and affiliation(s)

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Data from Airbag Modules Recovered from Car Fires and EEPROM Temperature Limits Based on Testing George Rayburn & Mike Stogsdill J.S. Held, LLC

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

194

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

George Rayburn • BSEET from Metropolitan State University of Denver • ACTAR 3907 • ASE Master Automotive & Medium/Heavy Truck Technician • Employed with JS Held, formerly Kineticorp, since 2018 March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Accident Reconstructionist

195

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

March 10-12, 2025

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

196

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Ford Focus

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

197

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Pre-burn and Post-burn

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

198

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

2011 Ford Fusion

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

199

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

2011 Ford Fusion

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

200

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

2012 Ford Focus

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

201

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

2012 Ford Focus

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

202

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

2005 Ford Taurus

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

203

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

2005 Ford Taurus

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

204

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

2005 Ford Taurus

2006 Chevrolet Cobalt SDM

2001 Chevrolet Cavalier SDM

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

205

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

2005 Ford Taurus

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

206

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

2005 Ford Taurus

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

207

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

2005 Ford Taurus

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

208

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Download – 2001 Chevrolet Cavalier SDM • In Storage post fire for ~ 6 years • Imaged the module prior to the fire in 2019 and then again in 2025.

• CDR Report generated without issue.

• Compared with original baseline report – no data changes.

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

209

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

2001 Chevrolet Cavalier SDM images Module – February 2019

March 10-12, 2025

Module – February 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

210

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

2001 Chevrolet Cavalier SDM images Data – February 2019

March 10-12, 2025

Data – February 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

211

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

2001 Chevrolet Cavalier SDM images Data – February 2019

March 10-12, 2025

Data – February 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

212

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

2006 Chevrolet Cobalt SDM images Module – February 2019

March 10-12, 2025

Module – February 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

213

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Download – 2006 Chevrolet Cobalt SDM • In Storage post fire for ~ 6 years • Imaged the module prior to the fire in 2019 and then again in 2025.

• CDR Report generated without issue.

• Compared with original baseline report – no data changes.

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

214

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

2006 Chevrolet Cobalt SDM images Module – February 2019

March 10-12, 2025

Module – February 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

215

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

March 10-12, 2025

EEPROM Testing Data from Airbag Modules Recovered from Car Fires and EEPROM Temperature Limits Based on Testing

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

216

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Other Thermal EEPROM Testing

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

217

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Other Thermal EEPROM Testing

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

218

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Other Thermal EEPROM Testing

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

219

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

March 10-12, 2025

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

220

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Why only the EEPROM?

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

221

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

2nd Generation Chevrolet Cobalt SDM

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

222

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

223

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

224

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

225

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Test 1 - 500°C Target Temperature 550

1022

500

932

450

842

400

752

350

662

300

572

250

482

200

392

150

302

100

212

50

122

0

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

800

900

1000

1100

1200

1300

Temperature [°F]

Temperature [°C]

Test 1 - 517°C / 963°F

32 1400

Seconds

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

226

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Test 2 - 450°C Target Temperature 500

932

450

842

400

752

350

662

300

572

250

482

200

392

150

302

100

212

50

122

0

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

800

900

1000

1100

Temperature [°F]

Temperature [°C]

Test 2 - 465°C / 868°F

32 1200

Seconds

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

227

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Test 4 - 700°C Target Temperature 800 750 700 650 600 550 500 450 400 350 300 250 200 150 100 50 0

0

50

100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500 550 600 650 700 750 800 850 900 950

1472 1382 1292 1202 1112 1022 932 842 752 662 572 482 392 302 212 122 32

Temperature [°F]

Temperature [°C]

Test 4 - 737°C / 1358°F

Seconds

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

228

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Test 5 - 650°C Target Temperature 700

1292

650

1202

600

1112

550

1022

500

932

450

842

400

752

350

662

300

572

250

482

200

392

150

302

100

212

50

122

0

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

400

450

500

550

Temperature [°F]

Temperature [°C]

Test 5 - 643°C / 1189°F

32

Seconds

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

229

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Test 6 - 550°C Target Temperature 600

1112

550

1022

500

932

450

842

400

752

350

662

300

572

250

482

200

392

150

302

100

212

50

122

0

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

400

450

500

550

600

650

700

Temperature [°F]

Temperature [°C]

Test 6 - 556°C / 1034°F

32

Seconds

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

230

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Test 7 - 500°C Target Temperature 550

1022

500

932

450

842

400

752

350

662

300

572

250

482

200

392

150

302

100

212

50

122

0

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

400

450

500

550

600

Temperature [°F]

Temperature [°C]

Test 7 - 503°C / 938°F

32

Seconds

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

231

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Test 8 - 450°C Target Temperature 500

932

450

842

400

752

350

662

300

572

250

482

200

392

150

302

100

212

50

122

0

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

400

450

Temperature [°F]

Temperature [°C]

Test 8 - 449°C / 840°F

32

Seconds

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

232

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Test 9 - 400°C Target Temperature 450

842

400

752

350

662

300

572

250

482

200

392

150

302

100

212

50

122

0

0

50

100

150

200

250

Temperature [°F]

Temperature [°C]

Test 9 - 408°C / 767°F

32

Seconds

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

233

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Raw data

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

234

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

CDR Reports Data – February 2019

March 10-12, 2025

Data – March 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

235

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Test 3 - 700°C Target Temperature 300

572

250

482

200

392

150

302

100

212

50

122

0

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

Temperature [°F]

Temperature [°C]

Test 3 - 266°C / 510°F

32

Seconds

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

236

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

March 10-12, 2025

Case Study - 5768 Data from Airbag Modules Recovered from Car Fires and EEPROM Temperature Limits Based on Testing

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

237

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

2019 Ford F150

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

238

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Subject RCM

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

239

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Subject RCM

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

240

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Subject RCM

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

241

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Exemplar RCM

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

242

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Memory

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

243

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

X-ray Chip Comparison Subject RCM

March 10-12, 2025

Exemplar RCM

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

244

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Chip Swap

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

245

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Chip Swap

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

246

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

CDR Report

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

247

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

March 10-12, 2025

Conclusion Data from Airbag Modules Recovered from Car Fires and EEPROM Temperature Limits Based on Testing

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

248

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Conclusions • The ACMs involved in car fires and subsequent firefighting efforts retained the impact-related data. This includes sitting dormant and untouched for about 6 years.

• The EEPROM in the Cobalt Module withstood a peak temperature of 426° F during a car fire test

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

249

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Conclusions • The subject EEPROMs withstood temperatures almost 5x beyond the manufacturer’s rated operating range and retained data and the ability to communicate • The inability to communicate with the EEPROM appeared to be linked to the presence of physical thermal damage to the exterior of the EEPROM

March 10-12, 2025

• Maximum temperature range for this EEPROM was between • ≥ 408°C / 767°F • ≤ 449°C / 840°F

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

250

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Further Testing Opportunities • Testing should be done using modules with other memory types.

• DRAM • SRAM • Flash memory

• Are newer technology components more heat resistant?

• What techniques exist for repairing chips with physical damage?

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

251

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Contact George Rayburn JS Held, LLC grayburn@jsheld.com 303-954-4855

March 10-12, 2025

Mike Stogsdill JS Held, LLC Mike.Stogsdill@jsheld.com 719-414-7438

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

252

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Analysis of the application of "nonstandard" (hacked) data retrieval tools Don Phillips National Forensic Engineers

March 10-12, 2025

W. R. Rusty Haight Collision Safety Institute

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

253

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Don Phillips • Since 1990, A consultant in accident reconstruction, automotive engineering and crashworthiness, product liability • Worked with EDR Data in support of reconstruction and automotive crashworthiness since 2007 • Helped design, test, and validate airbag systems for two of the big three US car manufacturers as well as some European and Japanese manufacturers in the late 1980s up to 1990

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

254

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

“Any data is good data” • Should we adopt the blanket notion that “any data is good data”?

• If a set of data is illegally or improperly obtained, is it still “good data?”

• Is data that can’t be subjected to objective testing be promoted as reliable data which can/should be used at trial?

• If a set of data is unreliable or someone can’t demonstrate it is reliably applicable to a given crash/case, is it still “good data?”

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

255

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

How do we “all benefit”?

• “… Jason Bayley, CEO of Collision Sciences in Toronto, has been working on adding Jaguar/Land Rover capability to his Crash Scan tool. He has several models and model years already reverse engineered and is working on the rest. He is also trying to get Jag/LR to give him the factory specs so he can support them all without the more time consuming reverse engineering and improve admissibility arguments. Since this is a work-in-progress Jason has not yet listed Jag/LR as officially supported by his tool, but he is far enough along that he authorized me to make this post sharing which model/model years on which they have success to date. …

• …If anyone has sent a Jag/LR ACM to Europe and gotten back hex data and the interpretation of it, and you are willing to share them with Jason, I am sure you could speed up his reverse engineering – Anon, on line post (emphasis added) efforts which we could all benefit from. …”

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

256

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

“Disclaimer” • Everything in this presentation is drawn from objective, publicly available information • Collision Sciences is, of course, free to conduct legitimate business • For those of us who have to rely on the data retrieved and translated being objectively reliable and supported, is “reverse engineered” (hacked) data, which is not supported by any OEM and can’t be objectively retested, the kind of thing we want to rely on in criminal or civil litigation?

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

257

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

“Reverse engineering” – exclusion potential • How can the misinterpretation or misuse of reverse engineered data and a resulting decision excluding it be used to undermine legitimate crash data?

• A judge decides “reverse engineered EDR data is unreliable and inadmissible” … by extension, in the right court after the “reinterpretation” by the right lawyer, we get to the more general “EDR data is unreliable and inadmissible” • Or at least back to where we were in ~2002-2005 where the translation reliability was routinely challenged

• Judge decides “if it can be reverse engineered, what’s to say someone can’t simply change the data so, therefore, how is it reliable at trial?”

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

258

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Legitimate data retrieval tools • The Bosch Crash Data Retrieval (CDR) Tool turned 25 on February 21, 2025 • First publicly offered for sale by Vetronix February 21, 2000

• Although there are those that would like to think Bosch has a “monopoly” on crash data retrieval, we forget that there are other tools available • The GIT tool for Hyundai and Kia • The Tesla EDR Tool • OEM specific/internal tools • Nissan • Jaguar Land Rover • Mercedes

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

259

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Data retrieval tools - generally • There is nothing prevent some other tool supplier to independently develop an alternative tool/system • With the help of an OEM for proper communication and data translation • If it made financial sense to that company

• For example, Autel could decide they want to make a CDR-type tool

• Would have to get licensing/cooperation from the OEMs (to do it right) • Would have to create a tool that would replace (and improve on) the function(s) of the Bosch tool that reaches back some 25+ years across a lot of OEM systems • Would have to evaluate the cost of developing that tool, then how many they could sell and at what price to get people to use their tool instead of the Bosch tool to offset their development costs and make a profit

• How big is the potential market for the tool such that it would justify someone else making the investment in developing a new CDR tool?

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

260

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

“Proper communication and data translation” • There is nothing prevent some other tool supplier to independently develop an alternative tool/system • With the help of one or more OEMs for proper communication protocol and data translation

• From either a criminal or civil litigation perspective, do we want data associated with EDR technology secure and reliable or not?

• But don’t existing regulations require the OEMs to give out the data translation specifics freely?

• Does an OEM have to provide that translation data to “anyone?”

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

261

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

“Capable of accessing and retrieving the data ” • “… 49CFR563.12 Data retrieval tools.

• Each manufacturer of a motor vehicle equipped with an EDR shall ensure by licensing agreement or other means that a tool(s) is commercially available that is capable of accessing and retrieving the data stored in the EDR that are required by this part. The tool(s) shall be commercially available not later than 90 days after the first sale of the motor vehicle for purposes other than – 49CFR563.12 Event Data Recorders (emphasis added) resale. …”

• Would you interpret this to say an OEM needs to give up the specs for a retrieval tool or details on how to build one and translate the data?

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

262

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

“Capable of accessing and retrieving the data ” • “… Article 4 – Data retrieval • “… 2.The vehicle manufacturer shall provide the type-approval authority and, at their request, any interested manufacturer or repairer of components, diagnostic tools or test equipment with information about how the event data can be accessed, retrieved and interpreted. …”

– EU Regulation 2019/2144 (emphasis added)

• “… Information about how…” – would you interpret this to say an OEM needs to give up the detailed specs for a retrieval tool or details on how to build a tool and translate the data or just explain it can be done?

• Q: How? • A:“With one of the tools we authorized from a supplier we work with”

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

263

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

“Event Data Recorder System” - PRC • “… EDR data retrieval tool • Means an electronic tool consisting of the hardware and software which meets below functions and is used for read EDR record data: • - Make a connection to the vehicle’s connector meeting requirements defined in a connector meeting requirements defined in GB/T 34589GB/T 34589 - 20172017 Road vehicles - Diagnostic connector or the EDR controller; • - Read the EDR data; • - Authenticate the un-translated binary EDR record translated binary EDR record and save it as a file a file into a PC; • - Open and authenticate a saved, un-translated file(s) containing an EDR record(s) – GB39732- 202, PRC and translate it into a human readable report. ...”

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

264

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

“Event Data Recorder System” - PRC • Unified data retrieval connector specified as part of GB/T 34589 2017 Road Vehicles diagnostic connector • Unified data retrieval dataset IDs • Unified data retrieval protocol

• Use diagnostic service 0x22 “ReadDatabyIdentifier“ in ISO 14229 “Road Vehicles unified diagnostic service” to retrieve EDR data

• Unified “data arrangement” (report)

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

265

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Responsive to the Chinese regulation • To comply with the Chinese regulation, OEMs… • Set up their ACMs to record the required data elements laid out in the PRC regulation • Set up their ACMs to make the specifically required data available in compliance with the PRC regulation • OEMs don’t necessarily make the same data (content, accessibility, or processing) accessible or retrievable in the same way for their cars sold outside China March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

266

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

As it relates to the Bosch CDR tool

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

267

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

“UDR”

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

268

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Universal access?

• The US regulation does not provide for unlimited, universal data access • The EU regulation says the OEMs tell a tool supplier “how” they can get the data where compliance could be as easy as saying “get this tool that we approved of and it will access and translate the data” • It would be a misinterpretation to think that the EU regulation specifies unlimited information regarding the communication process and specifics of data translation

• The Chinese regulation does specify a “universal” access and translation process for the required data elements • The OEM then make just that required data accessible in just that way

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

269

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

An “overlap…?”

• This is where we find the Collision Sciences CrashScan tool/system moving into a grey area between providing legitimate data access and a type of reverse engineering/hacking that…

• Would violate the Bosch CDR Tool End User License Agreement where they had to misuse the Bosch software to reverse engineer a translation of data and…

• Means that data retrieved using the CrashScan system would not only be less secure (from a litigation perspective) but open the door to accusations of “retrieved” data being altered by the morally flexible among us March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

270

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

March 10-12, 2025

CrashScan® “Non-standard" data retrieval tools

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

271

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Where did this all start?

• When Vetronix introduced the CDR Tool in February, 2000 the application was limited (GM only) and the target market was an unknown quantity • There was no 49CFR563 (or other regulation) in place

• Bosch acquired Vetronix in about 2003

• By then the tool supported some Ford vehicles and the primary market was law enforcement and the “early adopter” private reconstructionists

• There was little obvious marketing of the CDR Tool to the insurance industry • But why?

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

272

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Industry Sciences

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

273

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Scott Palmer and Industry Sciences • From a 2004 article by Insure.com: • “… Injury Sciences LLC, based in San Antonio, and Vetronix Corp., based in Santa Barbara, Calif., are aiming to give every auto insurance claims adjuster the ability to decode the complex data that many air bags record during an automobile crash. This data will aid the adjuster in determining what kind of injuries may have occurred as a result of the accident, according to Scott Palmer, CEO of Injury Sciences. …”

- http://www.insure.com/car-insurance/event-data-recorder.html accessed 9/10/2009

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

274

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Scott Palmer and Industry Sciences • From a 2004 article by Insure.com: • “… Palmer says his company's software, WrExpert (pronounced "reckspert"), will interface with Vetronix's crash data-grabbing technology to give claims adjusters insight into the following questions: What was the speed of a vehicle prior to impact? What was the severity of the impact? And, what injuries, if any, should be expected? WrExpert also can help insurers to root (-emphasis added) out fraud, he says. …”

- http://www.insure.com/car-insurance/event-data-recorder.html accessed 9/10/2009

• A version of WrExpert is still used today by some insurers March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

275

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Scott Palmer and Industry Sciences • From a 2004 article by Insure.com: • “… "WrExpert is the first product to my knowledge to allow a layperson to examine forensic science data," Palmer says. Traditionally, accident reconstructionists would piece together crash information. Claims adjusters now can have access to such information on their laptops, he says.. …”

- http://www.insure.com/car-insurance/event-data-recorder.html accessed 9/10/2009

• And Palmer even patented the process

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

276

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

US Patent 7974808 (application 4/2008) • “… Methods and apparatus for using black box data to analyze vehicular accidents • …Disclosed are methods and apparatus for using black box data to analyze vehicular accidents. The methods include obtaining information from an event data recorder associated with a vehicle and using the data obtained therefrom in determining and analyzing the vehicular accident. Attributes to be analyzed include impact severity, change in velocity, and other desired parameters. Further disclosed are methods to securely communicate the downloaded black box information to a secure location for later analysis and processing. …”

Inventors: Smith; Darrin A. (San Antonio, TX), Palmer; Scott (San Antonio, TX) Assignee: Injury Sciences LLC (San Antonio, TX)

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

277

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Patent 7974808 details • “… A computer-implemented method for assessing impact severity of an accident involving a vehicle, comprising: receiving black box information obtained from an event data recorder of the vehicle at a computer system remote from the vehicle, the black box information comprising at least one of a preimpact speed of the vehicle and a change in velocity of the vehicle; determining in the computer system the impact severity of the vehicle and a second vehicle, by modeling the impact severity in the computer system using the black box information, including performing a simulation to generate a distribution from simulation values including at least one of the pre-impact speed and the change in velocity; and outputting the impact - United States Patent: 7974808 severity from the computer system. …”

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

278

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Scott Palmer and the Insurance industry

Injury Sciences presentation to insurers by Scott Palmer, 2005

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

279

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Scott Palmer and the Insurance industry

Injury Sciences presentation to insurers by Scott Palmer, 2005

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

280

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Scott Palmer and the Insurance industry • Palmer would present at insurance conferences (i.e.: IASIU) and suggest that, while using the CDR Tool to get crash data was of enormous benefit to the insurers, the insurers “didn’t want the liability” of collecting the data themselves and should hire Injury Sciences to retrieve and then interpret the data for them • There was really never much of a definitive explanation of what that potential “liability” was … or wasn’t • Reinforced his claim of being the “… Only provider of OEM event data recorder or “black box” data harvesting network (in 37 states) and desktop evaluations for claims professionals …”

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

281

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Scott Palmer and the Insurance industry • In December 2012, CCC Information Services acquired Injury Sciences • The WrExpert subsequently offered through CCC Information Services

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

282

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

WrExpert example – Toyota 4Runner • Insured vehicle (Ford EcoSport) was pulling out from a stop for oncoming traffic • The claimant (4Runner) supposedly changed lanes as the insured began to make a turn • Claimant (4Runner) says they swerved to avoid turning insured vehicle but was hit on the side • Crash is described as a “t-bone” (there is damage to the side…)

• Delta-V and injury potential analysis obtained using the “WrExpert Pro Injury Causation Software” based on body shop estimates, no retrieved EDR data

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

283

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

WrExpert example – Toyota 4Runner

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

284

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

WrExpert example – from repair estimates • WrExpert software delta-V estimates and injury potential

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

285

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

WrExpert example – from repair estimates • WrExpert software estimated the delta-V for the 4Runner as 7-13mph and • The PDOF as 2-3 o’clock or acting basically right-to-left into 4Runner

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

286

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Toyota 4Runner EDR data • The Bosch CDR Tool retrieved data from the 4Runner shows that the effect of the crash to the side starting as a “Side” event and developing into a “Rollover”

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

287

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Toyota 4Runner EDR data • Side event data

March 10-12, 2025

Front Door

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

C Pillar

ACM

288

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Comparison WrExpert analysis • Change in Velocity: 7 13 (Low to Moderate) • Direction Of Impact: 2 3 o'clock

March 10-12, 2025

Analysis of EDR data • At the ACM, delta-V of about -2 mph over the short duration • PDOF visually not 2-3 o’clock

• No longitudinal data from this event

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

289

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

WrExpert caveats • No detained or specific assessment of injury potential in the WrExpert report • The delta-V is described only as “low to moderate”

• “… The output generated in this report, while based on reasonable biomechanical and engineering probability, is based solely on the information referenced herein.

The assessment for injury potential is based on the injury tolerance of an individual capable of withstanding the biomechanical forces imposed by ordinary activities of daily living.

• … This analysis should not be used as the sole basis for claims decisions and should be considered in the context of all available information in this matter. …” -emphasis added March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

290

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

From Injury Sciences to Collision Sciences • The Injury Sciences (WrExpert) approach was to access and retrieve data using the Bosch (Vetronix) CDR Tool or use body shop estimates alone and then generate an analysis and general predict severity (i.e.: “moderate”) • When there was data retrieval it was by way of the OEM-based Bosch CDR Tool

• The Collision Sciences approach is to shift the access and retrieval step to their CrashScan “tool” followed by the implementation their own AI-driven process for evaluating the data and adding additional “eye wash” to their report/output

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

291

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

March 10-12, 2025

The CrashScan report – or, “what do I get for $300?”

“Non-standard" data retrieval tools

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

292

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

What is CrashScan/Collision Sciences?

• Collision Sciences is…

• “… is a global technology and information provider that enables insurance carriers and corporations significant financial and operational benefits through scaled access and intelligent application of vehicle “black box” pre-crash data, biomechanical injury severity risk data, diagnostic repair data, and reconstructed motor incident data. …”

• The Collision Sciences CrashScan tool is…

• Hardware: OBD II connectivity using the commercially available OMDLinkMX+ Bluetooth scantool and • Software: the CrashScan mobile phone app from Collision Sciences

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

293

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

OMDLinkMX+ Bluetooth “scantool” • A company separate from Collision Sciences

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

294

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

The CrashScan app • The CrashScan from Collision Sciences app interface

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

295

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

The CrashScan app • The software interface from Collision Sciences

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

296

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

The CrashScan app • The software interface from Collision Sciences

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

297

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Screen shots from a Collision Sciences video

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

298

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Screen shots from a Collision Sciences video

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

299

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Screen shots from a Collision Sciences video

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

300

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Screen shots from a Collision Sciences video

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

301

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Screen shots from a Collision Sciences video

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

302

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Screen shots from a Collision Sciences video

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

303

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Screen shots from a Collision Sciences video

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

304

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Screen shots from a Collision Sciences video

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

305

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Screen shots from a Collision Sciences video

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

306

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Screen shots from a Collision Sciences video

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

307

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Screen shots from a Collision Sciences video

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

308

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Screen shots from a Collision Sciences video

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

309

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Screen shots from a Collision Sciences video

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

310

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Screen shots from a Collision Sciences video

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

311

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Collision Sciences makes…

• … A lot of claims in their videos and promotional material

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

312

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

CrashScan report summary and sections •Repair/Loss Exposure •Occupant Injury Risk • Pre-Crash Data • Flags/Loss Indicators •Safety Issues/Ratings •Recommended Action March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

313

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

“Repair/Loss Exposure”

“… Repair / Loss Exposure The market value range for the vehicle is USD $30,718.81 – USD $37,678.81. The vehicle is predicted to be a TOTAL LOSS. …”

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

314

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

“Occupant Injury Risk”

• Although mostly a potential civil case issue, imagine this report being in a case file where the report is provided to the other side in discovery and this “expert worthy” information says the plaintiff/claimant has 100% chance – “almost certain” – probability of injury March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

315

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

100% “Occupant Injury Risk”

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

316

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

“Occupant Injury Risk”

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

317

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Uncredited reference vs the original

“Acceleration Perturbations of Daily Living,” Allen, et al, 1994, SPINE, V19, No11

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

318

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

“Occupant Injury Risk” – linked how?

• “… The most important factor in predicting the risk of injury or death in a vehicle crash is the crash severity, which is expressed as the velocity change, or Delta-V, experienced by the vehicle during the crash. …”

• “… The Crash Investigation Sampling System (CISS) is the largest database in the world with over 100,000 cases linking injury outcomes with Delta-Vs, which are obtained from field reconstructions. …”

• “… The effects of occupant age, gender, and belt use on injury and fatality risk have been found substantial. …”

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

319

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

“Pre-Crash Data” “… Pre-Crash Data The following reconstruction data analysis relates to the severe frontal crash that was detected by the Event Data Recorder (having a recency of 1 ignition cycles ago): Within the 5.0 seconds of recorded pre-impact data for the most recent crash, the recorded speed range on this vehicle was 11 mph to 20 mph. The vehicle speed was 11 mph at the moment of impact.

Driver/Vehicle Maneuver: Going left. …”

• This “analysis” comes from the data retrieved from the EDR • The process of retrieving the data had to be reverse engineered – no OEM gave them that information so what check is there to see if it was done correctly?

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

320

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

“Crash data records” • “…(average) acceleration in the most recent crash event was 4.36 g. …”

• “… maximum Delta-V … as measured by the airbag module's accelerometer reached 25.00 mph within 190 milliseconds…”

• “… instantaneous peak force level of 16.99 g …”

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

321

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

“Pre-Crash Data”

“… Pre-Crash Data Within the 5.0 seconds of recorded pre-impact data for the most recent crash, the recorded speed range on this vehicle was 11 mph to 20 mph. The vehicle speed was 11 mph at the moment of impact.

• This is from a German vehicle’s module • The report doesn’t include the time between the last sample and T0 • The “0.0” sample could be up to 500ms old “at T0

• Not a “moment of impact”

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

322

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

“Pre-Crash Data” • Steering angle is recorded as a number “… Driver/Vehicle Maneuver: Going left. …”

• Polarity is assigned in the CDR Tool software data translation • Per OEM spec

• The OEMs have not provided Collision Sciences with any translation information • How can one say the translation is reliable?

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

323

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

“Flags/Loss Indicators”

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

324

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

“Flags/Loss Indicators” • The “evidence of prior damage” in this report is that the translated data – although incompletely displayed – simply shows 5 prior event records • There’s no discussion of the delta-V of those events or whether any or all of those could have been AEB non-impact events which VW records as Non-Deployments

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

325

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

“Safety Issues/Ratings” • The report lists recall information from Transport Canada

• This information is captured from the Canadian Government “Motor Vehicle - https://wwwapps.tc.gc.ca/ Safety Recalls Database” website March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

326

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

“Safety Issues/Ratings” • The displays IIHS data and the DTCs

• The source hardware is designed around a DYI’er Scantool

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

327

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

“Comparison” section

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

328

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

And, of course, there are disclaimers • “… The repair estimate does not replace a physical damage appraisal.

Collision Sciences is working with strategic partners to develop an advanced repair cost prediction algorithm using a combination of photo-based estimating, diagnostically detected impact configuration and severity, and diagnostic issues requiring repair. The repair estimate may currently be used to predict a total loss or repairable condition, identify potentially exaggerated repair estimates and provides a contextual frame of reference for claim severity. …”

• This sounds a lot like the Palmer patent…

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

329

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

“Event Data Disclaimer” • “… It is important to note is that if a vehicle was spinning or rolling surrounding the collision, then the report's speed measurements would not accurately reflect the actual speed of the vehicle during/after it lost control; the speed measurement is typically based on the wheel speed sensor. Signs of this type of anomaly would be rapid changes in speed between the brief timing intervals. The reported speed may be an average of the four wheels; thus could also be skewed by spinning wheels. In combination with scene evidence, an expert could assess vehicle speed by analyzing the data via – emphasis added accident reconstruction and engineering analysis.

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

330

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Well, they did qualify it … (“visit the vehicle”) • “… In combination with scene evidence, an expert could assess vehicle speed by analyzing the data via accident reconstruction and engineering analysis. …”

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

331

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

“Event Data Disclaimer” • Users of the Collision Sciences service and reviewers of the reports and exported data shall ensure that data and information supplied is applicable to the vehicle, vehicle's system(s) and the vehicle ECU. Collision Sciences Inc. and all its directors, officers, employees and members shall not be liable for damages arising out of or related to incorrect, incomplete or misinterpreted software and/or data. Collision Sciences Inc. expressly excludes all liability for incidental, consequential, special or punitive damages arising from or related to the online services, evidence logistics, EDR data, EDR software or use – emphasis added thereof. ..”

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

332

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Injury Risk / Biomechanical Assessment Disclaimer • “… The estimated injury risks are calculated based on the recorded crash pulse, relative energy changes, known vehicle characteristics in standardized and real-world crashes, published databases, and recognized studies. The provided information can be used as a guide in settlement decisions but cannot be used to definitively prove the existence or non-presence of an injury. In cases with a very low risk of whiplash or other injury, claims can be identified for further investigation. Conversely, for cases with a high risk of whiplash or other injury, the claim can be expedited, since early treatment is – emphasis added often effective in reducing the long term prognosis. …”

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

333

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Injury Risk / Biomechanical Assessment Disclaimer • “… Delta-V (Change in Velocity) has traditionally been used to correlate crash severity with risk of occupant injury [references] .

Injury tolerance and risk for various injury types based on realworld crashes with recorded crash data have been established [references]. Large-scale retrospective studies have also examined the relationship between minor severity crashes and the risk of occupant whiplash complaints, including studies in the U.S. – emphasis added [references]. …”

• But delta-V data is not typically provided in the CrashScan report March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

334

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Injury Risk / Biomechanical Assessment Disclaimer • Injury risk studies consider the following risk factors: • Crash configuration (front, side, rear, rollover), Delta-V = Change in velocity, Vehicle mass (size, weight), Vehicle stiffness, Vehicle geometry and engagement, Restraint system and its adjustment, Occupant seated position, Occupant profile (age, gender, previous injury), Number of WAD symptoms, and Psychological Distress. Structural damage and known whiplash thresholds overlap, indicating structural damage and repair cost are a poor predictor of minor injury threshold. Damage can also vary widely by vehicle – emphasis added model and impact configuration. …”

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

335

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

March 10-12, 2025

Case example #1 – 2020 Toyota Corolla

“Non-standard" data retrieval tools

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

336

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

2020 Corolla – case example • Case example from field testing – comparing the CrashScan with Bosch tool retrieved data • “Scan” done with the CrashScan and with the Bosch CDR Tool

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

337

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

2020 Corolla – case example

Actual crash date 2/23/23

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

338

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

2020 Corolla – anything missing?

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

339

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

2020 Corolla – case example

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

340

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Mixing terms and concepts • How many different ways does Toyota use the word “Trigger?”

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

341

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Trigger threshold vs T0 • “…Trigger threshold means a change in vehicle velocity, in the longitudinal direction, that equals or exceeds 8km/h within a 150 ms interval. For vehicles that record “delta-V, lateral,” trigger threshold means a change in vehicle velocity in either the longitudinal or lateral direction that equals or exceeds 8 km/h within a 150 ms interval. …”

• “…Event means a crash or other physical occurrence that causes the trigger threshold to be met or exceeded, or any non-reversible deployable restraint to be – 49CFR563.5 Definitions (emphasis added) deployed, whichever occurs first. …”

• But this is for triggering a recoding, not causing the module to begin “working the problem” – that’s covered in Time Zero and is not called out as 8km/h March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

342

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

1.51g is regulated…?

• What is the basis here?

• If we assume a recording threshold is 8km/h (5mph or 2.2m/s) and that it should occur over 150ms, the average acceleration is 14.66 m/s2 which is 1.495g (1.5g)

• Average, not a single point trigger threshold, the average acceleration that would be associated with a recording threshold of 8 km/h over 150ms not what causes T0 March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

343

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Is 1.51g correct?

– “Toyota Trigger Recording Process Test Series”, CDR User’s Summit 2015, - Bob Anderson, Biomechanics Analysis

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

344

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

2020 Corolla – “increasing?”

• What part of this is correct?

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

345

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

2020 Corolla – “increasing?”

• Accelerometers don’t measure delta-V, they capture acceleration • How can one calculate an “instantaneous peak force” from averaged delta-V which is already integrated from averaged acceleration • A 16.1km/h delta-V over 121ms would be an average of 3.77g • The PDOF (X and Y delta-Vs resultant) would be essentially 180deg not 174deg (but yes, rear-to-front)

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

346

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

2020 Corolla – case example

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

347

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

2020 Corolla – case example

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

348

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

“Flags/Loss Indicators”

• The “evidence of prior damage” in this report is that the translated data – although incompletely displayed – simply shows 1 prior event record: a “rollover” of this passenger car

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

349

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

2020 Corolla – case example • If you’re working with the CrashScan report and you ask them for the original EDR data – you really can’t get it • Although they claim it’s available, it is not

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

350

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

2020 Corolla – case example • The problem is, they won’t give you the underlying raw data because it would expose the fact that they’re using the Bosch CDR Tool software to reverse engineer (hack) the data translation although that violates the end user license agreement (EULA)

• So, if they were to give you the raw data, you’d see where they got the translation and how much of it they ignored or didn’t address in the “report”

• How can you explain the missing & misreported data elements in the report?

• How can you comply with the “Important Notice?”

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

351

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

March 10-12, 2025

Case example #2 – 2018 Ford Fiesta

“Non-standard" data retrieval tools

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

352

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

2018 Fiesta – case example • Case example from field testing – comparing the CrashScan with Bosch tool retrieved data • “Scan” done with the CrashScan and with the Bosch CDR Tool

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

353

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

2018 Fiesta – case example • Many of the same missing data and misreported or misinterpreted data elements appear in this report as well • The report has the same boilerplate “information as seen in the previous Toyota example…now it reads “Ford”

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

354

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Boilerplate

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

355

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Are we getting “all the data?”

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

356

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Crash severity

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

357

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Crash severity

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

358

Crash severity

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

359

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Injury analysis

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

360

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

2018 Fiesta – case example • Another example of largely boilerplate, repetitive jargon and filler to extend the report word count • Missed and misreported data elements • And, again, since we can’t get the CDRx file, we won’t really have all the data • And what if the other side in the case did get a standard Bosch CDR Tool CDRx file for this car?

• But didn’t we start out with “any data is good data?”

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

361

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

March 10-12, 2025

Case example #3 – 2013 Lincoln MKX

“Non-standard" data retrieval tools

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

362

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

2013 MKX – case example

• Insurance claim is a deer strike • In Texas

• Estimate the delta-V… March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

363

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

2013 MKX – case example • Case example from field testing – comparing the CrashScan with Bosch tool retrieved data • “Scan” done with the CrashScan and with the Bosch CDR Tool

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

364

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

“Assumed delta-V: -4.97mph:

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

365

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

2013 MKX – case example (deer strike) • Assume the oddly specific, to the second decimal place 4.97mph delta-V…

• For the MKX to have had a 4.97mph delta-V, assuming – generously – that it hit a 150lb deer, the Lincoln would have had to have been going about 138 mph • There is no reasonable basis for the “conclusion” that the delta-V for the MKX was anywhere close to -4.97 mph

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

366

366

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

2013 MKX – case example (deer strike) • Assume the oddly specific, to the second decimal place 4.97mph delta-V…

• For the MKX to have had a 4.97mph delta-V, assuming – generously – that it hit a 150lb deer, the Lincoln would have had to have been going about 138 mph • There is no reasonable basis for the “conclusion” that the delta-V for the MKX was anywhere close to -4.97mph

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

367

367

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

2013 MKX – case example • A report like this in the hands of the untrained suggests things like: • Fraud (i.e.: enhanced damage)

• A hit while parked and unoccupied case with “inconsistent” front damage • That there is, in a frontal impact, a 17% chance that the occupants could experience a “minor injury” (and what’s that worth in a claim?)

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

368

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

March 10-12, 2025

Expert witness implications “Non-standard" data retrieval tools

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

369

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Ethics • “… The policies and guidelines provided in this document are in place to protect the quality and integrity of all forms of scholarly practice and research, as well as the reputations of the publications produced by SAE International. …”

• “…Plagiarism is the unauthorized and/or unacknowledged use or imitation of works, language, and ideas of another.

• … Generally, in the context of article publication, plagiarism occurs when one researcher/author uses the words, language, tables/figures, or ideas of another researcher/author without making it clear within the narrative or referencing of the article that this has occurred, that is, passing off a piece of research or text as his or her own. …”

– Society of Automotive Engineers, Publishing Ethics Policy March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

370

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Remember this from Collision Sciences?

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

371

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Data Collection for Evidentiary Purposes • “… 1.2 The data collection methods used to retrieve data from the subject ECU or EDR include commercially available scan/interrogation/test tools and also include proprietary scan/interrogation/test tools with prior agreement of the parties involved. …”

• “…4.11 The provided and/or shared data can include all raw data collected, photo/video documentation of data displays on scan tools or laptop computers, hardcopies of raw data (if printing capability is available), and computer files of such data. This can also include any translations of raw data created by commercially available tools. …”

– ASTM International, Standard Guide for the Collection of Non-Volatile Memory Data in Evidentiary Vehicle Electronic Control Units

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

372

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Data Collection for Evidentiary Purposes • “… 4.2 A user of these guidelines who chooses to deviate from these guidelines is advised to obtain prior agreement from the involved parties. …

• … 4.3 Data collection is performed using commercially available tools and proprietary tools as agreed upon by the involved parties. It is always preferred to perform the data collection with the ECU or EDR installed and electrically connected to the subject vehicle. …”

– ASTM International, Standard Guide for the Collection of Non-Volatile Memory Data in Evidentiary Vehicle Electronic Control Units

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

373

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Ethics “… 5. Engineers shall respect the proprietary information and intellectual property rights of others, including charitable organizations and professional societies in the engineering field. …”

- The American Society of Mechanical Engineers, Code of Ethics of Engineers (Society Policy P-15.7), The Fundamental Principles

“… 5. Assume responsibility only for work that they have prepared or that has been prepared under direct supervision and control, and for which they can validate outputs used in its development. …” – Engineers Canada, Guideline on the Code of Ethics, July 2024 March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

374

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Do you want …

• Do you want your opinion to be based on OEM supported data which cannot be retested?

• California v. Trombetta, 467 U.S. 479 (1984) • The on-point EDR-specific case Oklahoma v Ingram CF-2006-403

• Retesting the data is a function of opening it in the latest version of the CDR Tool software (the Important Notice on page 1 of every report) • To see the latest translation • To make sure the original download is still digitally protected

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

375

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Do you want …

• Do you want your opinion to be based on a report that is demonstrably…

• Boilerplate, macro driven, and largely generic • Generated without the benefit of a comparison to actual case facts • No consideration given to the human, vehicle, environment

• Not a translation or retrieval method supported by any OEM and • Based on data which cannot be retested because you can’t get the original, raw data • The CDRx file is unavailable to the end user

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

376

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

I’m not a lawyer, don’t play one on TV, but…

• I would like to give a special thanks and contributor’s credit to: John Scott, of SKE Forensics Consultants, LLC Harris Feldman, Esq. of Blume Forte Fried Zerres & Molinari Michael Strickland, Esq. of Strickland & Kendall William Strickland, Esq. of Strickland & Kendall … for their help in preparing some of the information provided in the next part of this presentation March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

377

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

The witnesses’ oath • “… The oath to tell the truth is a legal requirement that ensures that the information presented in court is accurate and reliable. It is important to understand what is expected of you when taking the oath and to answer all questions truthfully. Perjury is a serious crime, and those found guilty of perjury can be sentenced to imprisonment. Taking the oath to tell the truth is a serious matter, and it should be taken seriously. …”

- https://reyabogado.com/us/how-do-you-swear-to-tell-the-truth-in-court/

• If you are in court and rely on the Collision Sciences report as the basis for your opinions, can you say with a reasonable degree of certainty that you can attest that all of the information in that report is accurate?

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

378

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Legal Challenges – Daubert and Frye • Lawyers usually follow a few “legals truisms:” • “You either have good facts or good damages, but you rarely have both” • “If the opposing expert is right on the facts, find a way to go after him personally” • “Go after the opinion if it’s weak, if the opinion is strong, go after the expert”

• So why use a shortcut and expose yourself to that potential?

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

379

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Legal Challenges – EDR data • Most challenges will be based largely on:

• Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals (92-102), 509 U.S. 579 (1993) • Kumho Tire Co. v. Carmichael, [143 L. Ed. 2d 238,] 119 S.Ct. 1167, 1176 (1999) • Frye v. United States, 293 F. 1013 (D.C. Cir. 1923) Frye v. United States, 293 F. 1013 (D.C. Cir. 1923) • Texas specific case: E.I. du Pont de Nemours Co. v. Robinson, 923 S.W.2d 549 (Tex. 1995)

• Most challenges directed at EDR technology may also be based on some sort of spoliation claim: • California v. Trombetta, 467 U.S. 479 (1984)

• Nally v Volkswagen of America Inc., 405 Mass. 191 (1989) • Iwanaga v. Daihatsu America, Inc., 2001 Westlaw 1910564 (W.D.Tex. 2001) • State of Oklahoma, Plaintiff, vs. Janet Ingram, Defendant, Case No. CF-2006-403 March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

380

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Legal Challenges – Daubert • “… (2) Whether the expert has unjustifiably extrapolated from an accepted premise to an unfounded conclusion. See General Elec. Co. v. Joiner, 522 U.S. 136 [139 L. Ed. 2d 508], 146 (1997) …”

• The court may conclude that there is simply too great an analytical gap between the data and the opinion

• “… (3) Whether the expert has adequately accounted for obvious alternative explanations. …

• Testimony excluded where the expert failed to consider other obvious causes for the plaintiff’s condition. The possibility of some uneliminated causes presents a question of weight, so long as the most obvious causes have been considered and reasonably ruled out by the expert

• “… (4) Whether the expert “is being as careful as he would be in his regular professional work outside his paid litigation consulting. …”

• Daubert requires the trial court to assure itself that the expert “employs in the courtroom the same level of intellectual rigor that characterizes the practice of an expert in the relevant field

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

381

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Legal Challenges – Daubert • Applying the Daubert standard, a motion to bar the expert’s testimony after discovery to show that the methodology employed does not meet the Daubert Standards • Without reliable methodology and involving oneself in illegal conduct to obtain the result an attorney would argue that using Collision Sciences’ CrashScan in its current state does not meet the 3 tests of the Daubert case and the court should not allow an expert to testify from the CrashScan “data” • If it were still allowed, it would provide an opportunity to opposing counsel to attack the expert on cross-examination March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

382

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Expert challenges and admissibility • Is the methodology “new and novel” or violative of some known and accepted protocol within the relevant field/industry?

• The Bosch CDR Tool, GIT Tool, Tesla Tool, and the common ECM Data tools used in Heavy Trucks have all been accepted as a known and proven methodology • The Collision Sciences Tool and software has not been given the same rigorous testing and endorsement by the OEM’s and others to ensure its accuracy and ability to predict qualitative values of injury prediction, crash severity, and driver’s intentions.

• Find a way to get the Collision Sciences methodology disclosed

• As an expert facing a Collision Sciences report, assist your client in preparing discovery questions on the weaknesses and missing data elements in the Collision Sciences “reports” vs a Bosch data translation report

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

383

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Legal Challenges – Frye • Using the Frye standard a lawyer would press for a hearing to disclose weaknesses in the expert’s use of the Collision Sciences tool and software • Lack of revision level disclosure

• What version of the CDR program did Collision Sciences hack and how many updates and patches have there been since?

• Show missing data when compared to the Bosch CDR Tool • What data was added or removed since the hacked version(s)?

• Note the Bosch CDR “Important Notice” on translating the data in the latest version of the software and • Can’t retest it independently like one can with the Bosch software

• What was the methodology used to determine the numerous qualitative statements in the Collision Sciences report

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

384

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Use of AI in Expert Opinions and Analysis • “….It has long been the law that New York State follows the Frye standard for scientific evidence and expert testimony, in that the same is required to be - see Frye v. United States, 293 F. 1013 [D.C. Cir. 1923] generally accepted in its relevant field. …”

• “….Recent decisions show that Courts have recognized that due process issues can arise when decisions are made by a software program, rather than by, or at the direction of, the analyst, especially in the use of cutting-edge - People v Wakefield, 175 AD3d 158 [3d Dept 2019] technology. …”

- https://reason.com/volokh/2024/10/16/n-y-court-opines-on-use-of-ai-by-experts/

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

385

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Use of AI in Expert Opinions and Analysis • “… In the instant case, the record is devoid of any evidence as to the reliability of Microsoft Copilot in general, let alone as it relates to how it was applied here.

Without more, the Court cannot blindly accept as accurate, calculations which are (emphasis added) performed by artificial intelligence. …”

- https://reason.com/volokh/2024/10/16/n-y-court-opines-on-use-of-ai-by-experts/

• Without knowing how the Collision Sciences report calculates or predicts injury levels, risk of injury, categorizing crash severity, or analysis of vehicle or driver response in the pre-crash data, all of these qualitative values on the report can be called into question because it is impossible to know how these values were determined or obtained.

• As trained EDR Analysts we CANNOT use the EDR data in a vacuum. A SITUATIONALLY COMPLETE ANALYSIS is needed.

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

386

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Bonus questions…

• If the reliability of the raw data can’t be supported through actual testing and is not supported by the OEMs, and the data on which a settlement decision was made is excluded in a hearing or trial, where does that leave the interests of the insured?

• Doesn’t this just read “bad faith?”

• From a criminal perspective, if this is reliable, why didn’t you use the CrashScan to retrieve “data” which might be exculpatory for the defendant?

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

387

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Bonus questions…

• If the “result” is “no data” because a hacked method that is not supported by the OEMS is used, but it turns out that the claimant’s investigator retrieved data with the appropriate tool locally, have the interests of the insured been effectively protected?

• Or did they get “no data” because they haven’t successfully hacked everything the Bosch CDR Tool does?

• “…CrashScan App vehicle support does not include 100% of EDR supported vehicles, but is the most universal on the market. Our support includes: Hyundai/Kia, Subaru, Mitsubishi, and Ford (which require pin-changing adapter), but does not include some FCA that require the pin-changing adapter …”

- CrashScan for Recon Experts (FAQ Resources), 8/2020 March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

388

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

“Any data is good data” • Should we adopt the blanket notion that “any data is good data”?

• If a set of data is illegally or improperly obtained, is it still “good data?”

• Is data that can’t be subjected to objective testing be promoted as reliable data which can/should be used at trial?

• If a set of data is unreliable or someone can’t demonstrate it is reliably applicable to a given crash/case, is it still “good data?”

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

389

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

“Reverse engineering” – exclusion potential • How can the misinterpretation or misuse of reverse engineered data and a resulting decision excluding it be used to undermine legitimate crash data?

• A judge decides “reverse engineered EDR data is unreliable and inadmissible” … by extension, in the right court after the “reinterpretation” by the right lawyer, we get to the more general “EDR data is unreliable and inadmissible” • Or at least back to where we were in ~2002-2005 where the translation reliability was routinely challenged

• Judge decides “if it can be reverse engineered, what’s to say someone can’t simply change the data so, therefore, how is it reliable at trial?”

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

390

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Recent Correspondence with Collision Sciences • As we neared the Summit, Collision Sciences reached out to us and wrote: • “… One thing I noticed that you should correct - is advertising our solution as "hacked" - please note that we are operating with OEM relationships. … In addition, we support some unique vehicle models - including a range of Jaguar-Land Rovers, which will be helpful for industry. …”

• “… Lastly - given the theme of your talk, I believe you could cover the legal precedent for the support of unofficially supported vehicles using expertise in hex data translation - there is some case law via Rick Ruth, where this evidence was admitted, I've seen for Hyundai/Kia, and maybe there is case law for the early generation Fords too. …”

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

391

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Recent Correspondence with Collision Sciences • We wrote back to Collision Sciences and asked:

• Which OEMs have actually licensed the translation of their EDR data to/with Collision Sciences for North America such that one can use CrashScan to retrieve airbag control module data and then translate it following an OEM approved and verified method?

• Would you address whether or not you can provide a CrashScan end user with the original digitally protected raw data from the ACM (or any ECU) that you are translating such that it can be retested? Meaning, be reopened in, for example, the Bosch CDR software to ensure that it's translated given the latest instructions and updates from an OEM?

• Through the end of the Summit, there was no reply March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

392

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Collision Sciences “Raw data” file • During the Summit, we were provided with an example of what Collision Sciences offers as a “DISCOVERABLE EVIDENCE FILE” – it is another PDF

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

393

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Collision Sciences “Raw data” file • From a “DISCOVERABLE EVIDENCE FILE” PDF

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

394

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

“DISCOVERABLE EVIDENCE FILE” • It may be called a “discoverable evidence file” but, as we can see, the unprotected PDF…

• …Can be opened in Acrobat and it can be altered • …There is no program available to reopen this “raw data” and/or retest it in the latest version of any software from the OEM or compare what was translated to an actual OEM supported translation

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

395

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Vehicle Delta V from Speed Data Robert D. Anderson Biomechanics Analysis Tempe, Arizona

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

396

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Robert D Anderson

• Biomechanical Engineer/Biomechanics Analysis -collision reconstruction and injury mechanics • ARC-CSI crash instrumentation back to 2006 • SATAI’s crash program since 2007 • 100’s of crash demonstrations • Dozens of crash related publications • Crash Team Boot Camp Instructor March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

397

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

March 10-12, 2025

Introduction Vehicle Delta V from Speed Data

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

398

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Introduction Discussion and case examples will be used to demonstrate when it is, and when it is not, appropriate to determine the polarity of a vehicle’s Delta V and/or the magnitude of that vehicle’s Delta V when the electronic evidence is limited to speed data.

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

399

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Introduction Situations with speed data without Delta V • Multiple Vehicle Crashes • Vehicle Control History • Front Recognition Camera Data • Heavy Truck EDR

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

400

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Introduction Situations with speed data without Delta V (continued) • Locomotive Black Box • Diagnostic Logs • Aftermarket Recordings • Track Logs • GPS data March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

401

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

March 10-12, 2025

Outline Vehicle Delta V from Speed Data

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

402

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Outline • Digital Representations • Sampling Theory • Crash Test Demonstration • Case Examples

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

403

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

March 10-12, 2025

Digital Representations Vehicle Delta V from Speed Data

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

404

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Digital Representations

We live in an analog world All modern signals are digital. For example: Music Movies Images

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

405

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Digital Representations Digital Representation – information in digital or computerized form Photographs Surveillance video Point clouds Blood Alcohol March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

406

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Digital Representations

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

407

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Digital Representations

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

408

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Digital Representations Crash tests are analog representations of crashes Crash test results and simulations are digital representations

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

409

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Digital Representations

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

410

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Digital Representations

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

411

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Digital Representations

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

412

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Digital Representations Delta-V, Longitudinal (SDM Recorded Vehicle Longitudinal Velocity Change for FSR Event) (MPH) 0

0

50

100

150

200

-1

250

300

350

Longitudinal Acceleration (SDM Recorded Vehicle Longitudinal Acceleration for FSR Event) (g) 0 -0.2

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

-0.4

-2

-0.6 -3

-0.8 -1

-4

-1.2 -5

-1.4 -1.6

-6

-1.8

-7

-2

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

413

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Digital Representations

EDR data is a digitized representation of an event Speed Accelerator pedal % Brake (on/off) – binary Steering wheel angle Yaw Rate Lateral acceleration Seat belt buckled (y/n) etc.

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

414

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Digital Representations

Fidelity – how well a set of data represents the original Could you physically recreate the event using the data?

Could you simulate the event using the data?

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

415

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Digital Representations

Fidelity – Requires sufficient sample rate (Hz) Requires sufficient resolution

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

416

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Digital Representations Binning/Bucketing: coarse/pixely versus higher resolution and faster sample rate

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

417

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

March 10-12, 2025

Sampling Theory Vehicle Delta V from Speed Data

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

418

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Sampling Theory - Aliasing:

Refers to distortion or unwanted noise: Not seeing what is there Seeing what it not there

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

419

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Sampling Theory - Aliasing:

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

420

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Sampling Theory - Aliasing:

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

421

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Sampling Theory - Aliasing:

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

422

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Sampling Theory - Aliasing:

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

423

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Sampling Theory - Aliasing:

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

424

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Sampling Theory - Aliasing:

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

425

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Sampling Theory - Aliasing:

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

426

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Sampling Theory - Aliasing:

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

427

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Sampling Theory - Aliasing:

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

428

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Nyquist-Shannon Sampling Theorem To Prevent Aliasing sample rate more than 2x’s the signal frequency

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

429

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Nyquist-Shannon Sampling Theorem

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

430

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Sampling Theory – SAE J211

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

431

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Sampling Theory – SAE J211

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

432

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Sampling Theory – SAE J211

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

433

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Sampling Theory – SAE J211

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

434

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Sampling Theory – SAE J211

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

435

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Sampling Theory – SAE J211

10 x CFC1000 = 10 kHz sample rate Then process with Class 1000 filter –> no aliasing March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

436

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Sampling Theory – SAE J211

Sampling theory provides analytical support SAE J211 – specifies best practice

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

437

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

March 10-12, 2025

Crash Test Example Vehicle Delta V from Speed Data

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

438

Crash Test Example (c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

439

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Crash Test Example March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

440

Crash Test Example – Lateral Delta V (c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

T = 0.175 sec

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

441

Crash Test Example – Lateral Delta V (c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

T = 0.33 sec

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

442

Crash Test Example – Lateral Delta V (c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

443

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

March 10-12, 2025

Case Examples Vehicle Delta V from Speed Data

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

444

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Case Example 1:

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

445

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Case Example 1:

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

446

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Case Example 1:

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

447

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

448

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Case Example 1:

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

449

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Case Example 2: Case Example 2:

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

450

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Case Example 2:

Toyota 02EDR in multiple vehicle rear-ender +8 mph Delta V, 1¾ secs later there was a -4.5 mph Delta V EDR evidence supports chain reaction where the middle vehicle was rear-ended into the vehicle ahead

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

451

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Case Example 2:

Why only a +2½ mph Delta V evident in pre-crash?

35 30

Speed (mph)

25 20 15 10 5

-6

-5

-4

-3

-2

-1

0

0

Time (s)

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

452

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Case Example 2: Where is the +8 mph Delta V?

35 30

Speed (mph)

25 20 15 10 5

-6

-5

-4

-3

-2

-1

0

0

Time (s)

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

453

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Case Example 2:

Case Example 2:

Why only a +2½ mph Delta V evident in pre-crash?

35 30

Speed (mph)

25 20 15 10 5

-6

-5

-4

-3

-2

-1

0

0

Time (s)

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

454

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Case Example 2:

Case Example 2:

Why only a +2½ mph Delta V evident in pre-crash?

35 30

Speed (mph)

25 20 15 10 5

-6

-5

-4

-3

-2

-1

0

0

Time (s)

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

455

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Case Example 2:

Case Example 2:

• 02EDR are prone to over-reporting rear-end Delta V’s • Accelerometer offset • Effect is small and less so for Delta V’s above ≈5 mph

• Speed readings do not necessarily update rapidly • Speedometer likely smoothed

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

456

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Case Example 2:

Case Example 2:

• Speed readings in 1 second increments: • Poor way to visualize Delta V • 1 sec is a long time compared to 1/10th sec collision duration • Hard braking at ¾ g is 16½ mph every second

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

457

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Case Example 3:

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

458

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Case Example 3:

2012 Kia Soul Struck in a glancing rear-end impact Can we get the Delta V from the GPS based dash cam?

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

459

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Case Example 3:

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

460

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Case Example 3:

March 10-12, 2025

Case Example 3:

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

461

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Case Example 3:

March 10-12, 2025

Case Example 3:

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

462

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Case Example 4:

Case Example 4:

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

463

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Case Example 4:

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

464

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Case Example 4: • 2014 Toyota Prius • 13EDR

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

465

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Case Example 4: • 2014 Toyota Prius • 13EDR

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

466

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Case Example 4: • 2014 Toyota Prius • 13EDR • No pre-crash since two subsequent events

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

467

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Case Example 4: • -7.2 mph Delta V with braking included

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

468

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Case Example 4: • Average speeds are accurate at constant speed • Speed from these dashcams appears to update every 1½ seconds • Moving average used for display

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

469

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Case Example 4: • Most GPS speeds are calculated from change in position divided by the difference in time • GPS Uncertainty leads to average speed uncertainty • Does not apply to Racelogic VBOX speeds

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

470

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Case Example 4: • GPS Uncertainty • quality of receiver • number of GPS satellites • atmospheric conditions • obstacles like trees or buildings • Circular Error of Probability (CEP)

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

471

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Case Example 4: • Circular Error of Probability (CEP)

• Typical consumer GPS has 5 to 16 feet accuracy under clear sky

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

472

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Case Example 5:

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

473

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Case Example 5:

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

474

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Case Example 5:

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

475

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Case Example 5:

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

476

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Case Example 5:

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

477

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Case Example 5:

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

478

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Case Example 5:

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

479

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Case Example 5:

30

25

Speed (mph)

20

15

10

5

-6

-5

-4

-3

-2

-1

0

0

Time (s)

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

480

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Case Example 6:

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

481

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Case Example 6:

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

482

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Case Example 6:

-29 mph DV

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

483

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Case Example 6:

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

484

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Case Example 6: 45

40

35

30

25

mph

29 mph?

20

15

10

5

0

0

5

March 10-12, 2025

10

15

seconds

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

20

25

485

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Case Example 6: 45

40

35

30

35½ mph?

mph

25

20

15

10

5

0

17

17.5

18

March 10-12, 2025

18.5

19

19.5

seconds

20

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

20.5

21

21.5

22

486

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Case Example 6: 45

40

35

30

32 mph?

mph

25

20

15

10

5

0

17

17.5

18

March 10-12, 2025

18.5

19

19.5

seconds

20

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

20.5

21

21.5

22

487

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Case Example 6: 45

40

35

30

25

mph

31 mph?

20

15

10

5

0

17

17.5

18

March 10-12, 2025

18.5

19

19.5

seconds

20

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

20.5

21

21.5

22

488

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Case Example 7:

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

489

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Case Example 7: • 2017 Toyota Camry • 13EDR • Record threshold ~5 mph Delta V • Events recovered = none

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

490

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Case example 7: • 2017 Toyota Camry • VCH download

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

491

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Case example 7: Brake Mpa 10

Trigger

9 8 7 6 5 4 3

Brake released

2 1

-6

March 10-12, 2025

-4

-2

0

0

2

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

4

6

492

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Case example 7: Acceleration x (g) 1.2

Trigger

1 0.8 0.6 0.4 0.2

-6

-4

-2

0

0

2

4

6

-0.2 -0.4 -0.6 -0.8 -1

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

493

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Case example 7: Speed (mph) 7

Trigger

6

5

4

6.214 mph?

3

2

1

-6

March 10-12, 2025

-4

-2

0

0

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

2

4

6

494

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Case Example 8:

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

495

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Example 8: • 2021 Toyota Venza • 19EDR • First Prior Event TRG15 +12½ mph

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

496

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Example 8: • 2021 Toyota Venza • 19EDR • First Prior Event TRG15 • Most Recent Event TRG16 -4½ mph

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

497

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Example 8:7: • 2021 Toyota Venza

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

498

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Example 8: • 2021 Toyota Venza

TRG15 1st Prior TRG16 MRE

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

499

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Example 8: • 2021 Toyota Venza EDR Pre-Crash Speed (MPH) 45 40 35 30 25

+10½ mph

20 15 10 5

-6

March 10-12, 2025

-5

-4

-3

-2

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

-1

0

0

1

2

500

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Example 8: • 2021 Toyota Venza

VCH Speed (mph) 50.0 45.0 40.0 35.0 30.0 25.0

+11 mph

20.0 15.0 10.0 5.0

-9

-8

March 10-12, 2025

-7

-6

-5

-4

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

-3

-2

-1

0.0

0

1

501

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Easy Video and Image Analysis.

Interactively orthorectify and overlay your video on scene data for accurate vehicle speed or position measurements. Solve for camera positions. You can even project images and video back into your scene and do 3D object overlays for more complex analyses. The process is quick and easy!

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Time and Position Analysis using Pre-Crash data relative to Time Zero Eric Paul

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

502

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Eric Paul I came to work at Dynamic Safety L.L.C. in Lake Zurich, IL after a 27-year law enforcement career in Wheaton, Illinois. I have spent the last 25 years as an Accredited Crash Reconstructionist investigating serious injury and fatal traffic collisions. I have experience in teaching law enforcement the science of vehicle collision investigation and reconstruction. Eric is a past President and Vice President of the Illinois Association of Technical Accident Investigators (IATAI).

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

503

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

The question might be framed this way…

How may we properly use a given set of EDR PreCrash data to approximate how far back a vehicle would be, in increments of distance for time, from an area of “impact” or area where “Time Zero” may have occurred?

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

504

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

This presentation • Limitations of the application

• Methodology

• Time and distance calculations adopting the conventions and limits of the data • Practical examples

• Evaluating an approximate location at “impact” and/or Time Zero (T0) • Data reporting limits (the units and the resolution) • Steady state speed or acceleration before T0 • Consider the Pre-Crash data sample capture rate

• Anyone can “do the math,” I’m going to talk about evaluating the input to get a useable solution

• Identifying the time between the “last sample before Time Zero” & T0

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

505

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

March 10-12, 2025

The Application Limits Time and position analysis using Pre-Crash data relative to Time Zero

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

506

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

The Task • For a time and distance (time and position) analysis, at a minimum, we need to identify …

• A frame of reference (distance to or from “where”) …

• The speed(s) the vehicle was traveling during …

• The increments of time leading up to or relative to the “where” frame of reference

• Anyone can “do the math,” the question is: to make the analysis meaningful, what are the limits or restrictions on the input data/information that would be used in the math to make calculated values useful?

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

507

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Data application considerations • Evaluating an approximate location at “impact” and/or T0 • Data reporting limits (the units and the resolution) • Steady state speed or acceleration before Time Zero (T0) • Consider the Pre-Crash data sample capture rate • Identifying the time between the “last sample before Time Zero” & T0 - Offered in no particular order

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

508

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Data application considerations • Much of the EDR data that OEMs share is based on interpretative compliance with 49CFR563 • The OEMs frame or format the data elements to be compliant with the requirements of the US regulation (and/or other relevant international regulations)

• For this discussion, we should set out some common words, terms and concepts so that we’re “all on the same page”

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

509

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Data application considerations • Evaluating an approximate location at “impact” and/or Time Zero (T0) • Data reporting limits (the units and the resolution) • Steady state speed or acceleration before T0 • Consider the Pre-Crash data sample capture rate • Identifying the time between the “last sample before Time Zero” & T0 March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

510

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

49CFR563.5 – “Time zero” • “… Time zero means whichever of the following occurs first: • (1) For systems with “wake-up” air bag control systems, the time at which the occupant restraint control algorithm is activated; or • (2) For continuously running algorithms,

• (i) The first point in the interval where a longitudinal cumulative delta-V of over 0.8 km/h (0.5 mph) is reached within a 20ms time period; or • (ii) For vehicles that record “delta-V, lateral,” the first point in the interval where a lateral cumulative delta-V of over 0.8 km/h (0.5 mph) is reached within a 5ms time period; or

• (3) Deployment of a non-reversible deployable restraint. …”

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

511

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

SAE J1698 – Beginning of Impact Event (Time Zero) “…The beginning of an impact event (time zero) is defined by: • (1a) For systems with “wake-up” occupant protection control algorithms, the time at which the occupant protection control algorithm is activated. or • (1b) For continuously running occupant protection control algorithms, the time when the cumulative Delta-V of over 0.8 km/h (0.5 mph) is reached within a 20-ms time period in the longitudinal direction for a frontal/rear event or within a 5-ms time period in the lateral direction for a side impact event or • (2) A deployment of a non-reversible deployable protection device occurs. This does not include the deployment of subsequent stages of a multi-stage deployable protection device. …”

- SAE J1698 - “Event Data Recorder - Output Data Definition” (Jan 2023) at 4.1.1

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

512

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

SAE J1698 – Beginning of Impact Event (Time Zero) • “… 4.1.1 Beginning of Impact Event (Time Zero) … (continued) • The beginning of an impact event (defined herein) shall not be interpreted as the moment when the subject vehicle makes a first physical contact with another object. The beginning of an event also does not mark the condition that determines whether to record the event data associated with the event for subsequent retrieval. The purpose of defining the beginning of an event is to enable the alignment of data elements from multiple recording devices on – emphasis added a vehicle. …”

- SAE J1698 - “Event Data Recorder - Output Data Definition” (Jan 2023) at 4.1.1

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

513

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

SAE J1698 – Beginning of Impact Event (Time Zero) • “… 4.2.1 Beginning of Pedestrian Impact Event (Time Zero) …

• The beginning of a pedestrian impact event (time zero) is defined by: • (1a) For systems with “wake-up” pedestrian protection control algorithms, the time at which the pedestrian protection control algorithm is activated. …”

• This is for pedestrian impacts but comparable to the “normal” T0 definition - SAE J1698 - “Event Data Recorder - Output Data Definition” (Jan 2023) at 4.2.1

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

514

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

SAE J1698 at..

4. EVENT DEFINITIONS, 4.1 Front/Side/Rear Impact Event, Figure 1 “… This figure is a very simplified image of event data to illustrate common referencing data points and it is not drawn to scale. Depending on the direction of impact, delta-V and/or acceleration data may be in either positive or negative values. …”

- SAE J1698 - “Event Data Recorder - Output Data Definition” (Jan 2023)

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

515

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

This might more clearly show that that “impact” and “Time Zero” are not the same “ The beginning of an impact event (defined herein) shall not be interpreted as the moment when the subject vehicle makes a first physical contact with another object. …”

- SAE J1698 - “Event Data Recorder - Output Data Definition” (Jan 2023)

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

516

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

“Time zero” isn’t the same as “impact” • Since T0 is “… not (to) be interpreted as the moment when the subject vehicle makes a first physical contact with another object…*”, for this analysis, we should define some point “on the road” relative to which we want to calculate a distance using Pre-Crash data • For either a time (or a calculated distance), what is the time between where there may be the “first physical contact” and where T0 is established?

• We can evaluate how significant that time (or distance) is depending on other conditions – not the least of which is the speed of the vehicle over the ground at/near that point * SAE J1698 - “Event Data Recorder - Output Data Definition” (Jan 2023) at 4.1.1

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

517

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

“Time zero” isn’t the same as “impact” • If we’re going to work “backwards” from a “point” (on the road) how specific/precise/reliable is that as a “point?”

• Can we actually “pinpoint” where the car we’re using data from was at T0?

• Can we “pinpoint” where the actual “point” of first contact is or do we normally adopt a reasoned “area of impact?”

• A reasonable range taking into account things that can be documented/measured such as tire marks on the roadway from the crash

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

518

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

“Time between” considerations • Is the ACM responding to satellite sensor data which, for a “continuously running” system, might create a time offset from where the ACM sets T0 to be compliant with the definition?

• May be reported as a “Time offset” in some data sets

• Are the dynamics of the crash such that there might be a relative “long time” between “impact” and the ACM setting T0?

• Dependent on the “wake-up” threshold for a given ACM/vehicle configuration • Dependent on dynamics including underride or side impacts

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

519

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

“Time offset” examples • While few OEMs report a time offset, it may appear in a data set

• ~10ms isn’t going to make a significant difference in a calculated distance

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

520

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

“Time offset” examples • Toyota data may indicate a time between the TRG (Trigger) to the next sample of post-crash data • Toyota uses “Trigger” in more than one context • T0 trigger and recording threshold trigger depending on the module generation • Time from the last independent Pre-Crash data point may be reported

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

521

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Time between convention • There isn’t likely to be a universal “best fit” definition for where we work “backwards” from using the Pre-Crash data to complete a time and distance analysis leading to “impact” versus T0 • But the one thing we have in every set of data is that the Pre-Crash data is reported relative to T0 not “impact” • At 49CFR563.7 “Data Elements” we see the reference “relative to time zero”

- 49CFR563 - Event Data Recorders

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

522

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Time between convention • As a convention for this presentation, I have adopted T0 as a common reference “point” so a time and distance analysis would be worked “backwards” from that “point” • Initially without respect to where it might be on a roadway

• The analyst would later have to make “best judgement” adjustments based on available objective information to create a best fit for the calculated distance to a “point (or area) of impact” on the road • Assuming that may be objectively more narrowly identified

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

523

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Data application considerations • Evaluating an approximate location at “impact” and/or Time Zero (T0) • Data reporting limits (the units and the resolution) • Steady state speed or acceleration before T0 • Consider the Pre-Crash data sample capture rate • Identifying the time between the “last sample before Time Zero” & T0 March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

524

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Range and resolution • Range is “the field of values”

• In EDR data, a range for “Speed, vehicle indicated” is between 0 and 200 km/h • Without polarity

• Resolution is the smallest increment that an instrument can display • Detail or precision • In EDR data, resolution for “speed, vehicle indicated” is +/-1km/h

- 49CFR563.8 - Event Data Recorders

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

525

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Range – “a field of values” • Range may be indicated in data translation reports in different ways

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

526

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Range – “a field of values” • Range may be indicated in data translation reports in different ways • “… The reported range of the longitudinal and lateral acceleration values is approximately ± 50 g. …”

– 01043_SDM10P-conti • “… The design range for the angular rate data is:

• - +/- 240 deg/sec for Bosch ACMs unless specifically called out below • - +/- 299.48 deg/sec for the 2023-2024 MY Alfa Romeo Tonale and Dodge Hornet …

• - +/- 300 deg/sec for TRW ACMs, the 2019 MY RAM 1500, and the 2018+ MY Dodge Journey • - +/- 290 deg/sec for 2008+ MY minivans and 2009-2017 MY Dodge Journey • - +/- 340 deg/sec for 2017+ MY Chrysler Pacifica and new 2017+ MY Jeep Compass • - -416.67 deg/sec to +413.41 deg/sec for 2014+ MY Jeep Cherokee …”

– 03002_Chrysler

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

527

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Range – “a field of values” (0 km/h to…)

• “… The upper limit for the recorded "Vehicle Speed" value is 200 km/h (125mph). Resolution is 1km/h (0.6mph) and the value is rounded down and recorded. …”

– 05017_ToyotaS00std • The upper limit for the recorded "Vehicle Speed" value is 122 km/h (75.8mph). Resolution is 2km/h (1.2mph) and the value is rounded down and recorded.

– 05004_ToyotaDENSO • The upper limit for the recorded "Vehicle Speed" value is 126 km/h (78.3mph). Resolution is 2km/h (1.2mph) and the value is rounded down and recorded.

– 05002_ToyotaTRW March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

528

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Data reporting limits – units and resolution • What are the units of speed element we’re working with and what is the resolution of that speed data?

• The units for the “Speed, Vehicle Indicated” element are going to be, for the most part, represented (reported) in km/h as it was originally captured in the ACM • Both SAE J1698 and 49CFR563 call for the “speed” to be reported in km/h • Some systems may only report “speed” in Imperial units, some only in metric

• The display resolution is going to be, for the most part, rounded to 1km/h

• Both SAE J1698 and 49CFR563 call for the data element units to be reported at a minimum resolution of +/-1 km/h • Some data sets may report speed at higher resolution

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

529

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Data reporting limits • If the original data is captured and recorded in the ACM in km/h and, as a matter of convenience for some end users, it’s also displayed in mph, and if the original data is rounded to the 1 km/h resolution, which speed value is going to be “best” to work with?

• At the ACM, speed data may be rounded to the nearest km/h, then that rounded number is converted to a value in mph in the report which, in some cases, is also rounded again before being displayed in that data translation report

• So do we want to use a number that is (a) rounded once or a number that has been (1) rounded, and then (2) converted, then (3) rounded again, and, then (4) converted in a calculation?

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

530

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Reported speed examples

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

531

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Resolution after conversion vs display • 49CFR563 calls for 1 km/h resolution

• The reported speed data element resolution is 1 km/h in this data translation report • Here, the value converted to Imperial has higher apparent precision

mph km/h

39.8 64.052

40.4 65.017

39.1 62.925

35.4 56.971

29.2 46.993

• The conversion “back” from the displayed Imperial value suggests what the pre-rounding metric value would most likely have been before the 1 km/h compliance driven reporting

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

532

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Resolution after conversion vs display mph km/h

46 74.030

47.2 75.961

44.7 71.938

38.5 61.960

mph 2.5 3.7 5.0 6.2 7.5 8.7 9.9 11.8 14.3 18.6

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

km/h 4.023 5.955 8.063 9.978 12.070 14.001 15.933 18.990 23.014 29.934

533

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Data reporting limits – detailed • “… Speed, Vehicle Indicated - This indicates the average of the wheel speeds of the drive wheels.

• The reporting resolution for Speed, Vehicle Indicated is 1 km/h.

• To display this data element in mph, the CDR Tool converts the km/h to mph and reports a rounded value in mph. …

• On some vehicles capable of speeds in excess of 255 km/h (about 158 mph), the actual vehicle speed may have exceeded the reporting range. …”

- 03002_Chrysler (emphasis added)

• The Data Limitations addresses the data source, units, resolution, and range March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

534

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Approach with least uncertainty • On the one hand, using “speed, vehicle indicated” in mph, we’re making a calculation that uses a number that has been rounded, and then converted, and then potentially rounded again • (or reported with greater precision than the number it was converted from)

• On the other hand, we may find someone trying to report a distance in a time and distance analysis to a fractional foot (or meter) from input that has been rounded and converted • Creating a distance with artificially greater precision than the underlying input values

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

535

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Reported speed examples • Which is the “right speed” – metric or Imperial?

• Is 52 km/h = 32 mph or is 51 km/h = 32 mph

• 52.0 km/h is 32.3 mph – reported as properly rounded at 32 mph • 51.0 km/h is 31.7 mph – reported as properly rounded at 32 mph

• Conversely, is 30 mph = 48 or 49 km/h?

• Clearly, the underlying recorded metric value has been rounded before display to the nearest 1 km/h then the Imperial value was rounded to the nearest 1 mph value • Shouldn’t we work with the least rounded and converted numbers no matter how minor the difference in the end result might be?

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

536

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Conversion isn’t always immediately clear • How can 92 mph correctly convert to a range between 147 and 149 km/h? (isn’t there “just one conversion” between metric and Imperial?”)

Or… • If the data is recorded as 147 km/h, how does that convert to both 91 and 92 mph?

• And, of course, how is 146 km/h also converted to 91 mph…?!

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

537

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Conversion isn’t always immediately clear • Find the values which would round to a displayed speed of 92 mph • Column F: >91.49 to ≤92.49 mph round to 92 mph

• Convert the data in Column F to find the metric equivalent of Column F values • Column G: 147.24 to 148.85 km/h

• Find the values in Column F which would be reported as 147 km/h after rounding?

• Column G: >147.24 to ~147.4 km/h • 147.0 km/h converts to 91.34 mph which would be reported as 91 mph … which isn’t in this range

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

538

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Conversion isn’t always immediately clear • Later, we’re going to have to make another conversion from mph to fps, for example, for a time and distance analysis • So, if we use the rounded, converted, rounded, and converted speed in fps in a calculation, how much are we diluting the analysis with all those steps?

• But still seem to want to report a distance to a tenth of a foot…

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

539

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Data reporting limits • To minimize the uncertainty introduced as a function of rounding and then conversion (and then potentially rounding again), this analysis should normally be done with the metric data • The original form of the recorded then translated speed data

• As a convention then, for the time and distance analysis, we’ll work in the original units in km/h found in a data translation report • The conversion from the calculated metric distance (meters) can then be done at the end with only one conversion step to an Imperial distance (feet) • Then rounded based on the uncertainty/significant digits of the input data March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

540

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Data application considerations • Evaluating an approximate location at “impact” and/or Time Zero (T0) • Data reporting limits (the units and the resolution) • Steady state speed or acceleration before T0 • Consider the Pre-Crash data sample capture rate • Identifying the time between the “last sample before Time Zero” & T0 March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

541

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Steady state speed or acceleration pre (T0)?

• The easiest calculation for time and distance is done using a “constant” speed over a uniform, specified time • But what about when the speed is not “steady state”?

• Uniform/variable time is a separate discussion for later in this presentation

• Practical analyses will often have to take into account the potential for the vehicle from which we have the data slowing or speeding up Pre-Crash

• Similarly, whether the reported speed may be underreported as a function of wheel slip (braking or yaw) • There is the potential for the speed to be overreported, in the right circumstances

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

542

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Steady state speed or acceleration pre (T0)?

• The end user will have to evaluate the other Pre-Crash data parameters in a specific analysis to determine if the reported speed may be underreported • Braking (particularly when a percentage of braking is reported) • Pre-Crash longitudinal acceleration (when reported from stability systems) • ABS Activity (assuming the data means the ABS was controlling the brakes) • Yaw rate (where the magnitude indicates wheel slip)

• Not all elements apply in every analysis

• The effect of wheel slip, for example, might not be significant or readily apparent in a small set of data or over a small time sample/period

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

543

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Steady state speed or acceleration pre (T0)?

• Is the last sample before T0 underreported as a function of slip?

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

544

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Steady state speed or acceleration pre (T0)?

• Is the last sample before T0 underreported as a function of slip?

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

545

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Steady state speed or acceleration pre (T0)?

• Turns out, this car didn’t have ABS…

• …would it be reasonable to use the speeds after the “-3s” point as reliable for a distance over time calculation?

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

546

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Data application considerations • Evaluating an approximate location at “impact” and/or Time Zero (T0) • Data reporting limits (the units and the resolution) • Steady state speed or acceleration before T0 • Consider the Pre-Crash data sample capture rate • Identifying the time between the “last sample before Time Zero” & T0 March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

547

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Don’t confuse “capture” with “record” • “… Capture means the process of buffering EDR data in a temporary, volatile storage medium where it is continuously updated at regular time intervals. …” – emphasis added • Here, the regular, periodic “snapshots” of Pre-Crash data coming from other computers in the car on the communications bus and available to the ACM’s EDR subcomponent

• “… Record means the process of saving captured EDR data into a non-volatile device for subsequent retrieval. …”

• Where previously captured data is written to the EEPROM after an event qualifies for recording

- 49CFR563.5(b)

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

548

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Misrepresenting Pre-Crash data capture • “… If things are not simultaneous, they are NOT synchronized, but rather they are “asynchronous,” like the data recorded by an event data recorder (EDR).

Even though it gets lumped together in one bin labelled, for instance, “-3 seconds”, all those data points were just collected SOMEWHERE during that – Anon., emphasis added second. Not at exactly the same moment. …”

• This widely circulated assertion is wholly incorrect and it misstates the whole concept of how data is actually captured by the ACM’s EDR subcomponent • The misinformation then convolutes how the Pre-Crash data can be used for a time and distance analysis

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

549

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Pre-Crash data sample capture rate • “… all those data points were just collected SOMEWHERE during that second. Not – emphasis added at exactly the same moment. …”

• If data capture were “somewhere” during that second, NHTSA, in 49CFR563, wouldn’t be able to specify “regular intervals”: • “(Other definitions) …Capture means the process of buffering EDR data in a temporary, volatile storage medium where it is continuously updated at regular – 49CFR563.5(b) - emphasis added time intervals. …”

• “Regular” IS “repeatedly the same” not “somewhere during” March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

550

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Pre-Crash data sample capture rate • “… all those data points were just collected SOMEWHERE during that – emphasis added second. Not at exactly the same moment. …”

• The ACM is a computer, it collects/captures data at a specific, programmed rate controlled by the processor clock – there’s no allowance for some random “somewhere during” capture rate • 49CFR563 calls for Pre-Crash data to be captured 2 times per second not “about 2 times per second, or “somewhere” in the two halves of a second

• The sample (capture/collection) rate is programmed to be at fixed, regular intervals March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

551

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Pre-Crash data sample capture rate • “… all those data points were just collected SOMEWHERE during that – emphasis added second. Not at exactly the same moment. …”

• If data capture were “somewhere” during that second, SAE J1698 wouldn’t be able to specify:

• “…the last data point may have been captured just before time zero but no more than 0.5 second before time zero. All subsequent pre-crash data values are referenced from this data point. …”

– emphasis added - SAE J1698 - “Event Data Recorder - Output Data Definition” (Jan 2023)

• The singular “point” is not the same as “somewhere during” March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

552

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Pre-Crash data sample capture rate • If data capture were “somewhere during” that second, the information found in virtually all OEM Data Limitations would also be wrong: • “...Pre-Crash Data is recorded at 2 samples per second starting 5 seconds before t0. ...”

- 0805_BMW_ACSM5

• “...Pre-crash data is recorded at 2 samples per second within the 5 seconds before T0. ....”

-04001_HondaSRS_GEN1

• “...Time-continuous pre-crash data is recorded at two samples per second for 5 seconds before Time Zero. ...” -14001_VWG4000AL

• None tell the end user data is collected “somewhere” around about 2 samples per second, it says “at ” – the Data Limitations are more specific March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

553

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

“Asynchronous” is also used incorrectly • “… If things are not simultaneous, they are NOT synchronized, but rather they are “asynchronous,” like the data recorded by an event data recorder (EDR).

Even though it gets lumped together in one bin labelled, for instance, “-3 seconds”, all those data points were just collected SOMEWHERE during that second. Not at exactly the same moment. …”

– Anon., emphasis added • THE Statement misrepresents how “asynchronous” is used in this technology

• Asynchronous data refers to the idea that the sources of the Pre-Crash data are not synchronized with/to each other and that Pre-Crash and Post-Crash data are on either side of T0 and not synchronized to each other March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

554

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Asynchronous as used in Data Limitations • “...Signal information originating from other control units in the car have delays, this has to be taken into account when observing information at crash time. Examples of signals in the EDR record originating from other control units are: - Speed, vehicle indicated (ABS module) - Engine throttle (ECM module) -11002_Volvo002 (emphasis added) - Service brake (ABS module) ...”

• "...Pre-Crash data is recorded in discrete intervals. Due to different refresh rates within the vehicle's electronics, the data recorded may not be -05017_ToyotaS00std (emphasis added) synchronous to each other. ..."

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

555

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Asynchronous – does it matter?

• When we think about a time and distance analysis, we should consider the potential for data signals to be made available on the communication bus at a different rate than it may be captured by the ACM’s EDR function • For example, if vehicle speed is updated by the source computer every 512ms but the sample rate is every 500ms, a regularly occurring snapshot of Pre-Crash data captured at “time n” may not capture a change in the indicated speed which may not be available on the communication bus until after the snapshot was captured (collected)

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

556

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Asynchronous – does it matter?

• The central idea is that Pre-Crash data has a lower bus transmission priority than, for example, acceleration captured by the ACM’s internal or satellite accelerometers

• What is more important to the ACM function: g’s acceleration as a function of the crash or Pre-Crash speed which isn’t part of the deployment decision making process?

• We’re trying to use “Speed, vehicle indicated” as an input in a calculation and then assuming it approximates the speed at the time it was captured • Knowing there really may some hysteresis between when the speed is measured/calculated in the car and where it’s reported and then where it’s captured by the ACM March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

557

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Latency vs hysteresis, for this discussion…

• Latency is a delay between an input and an occurrence

• The time difference between a wheel speed signal (input) getting to the ABS module, the ABS module calculating a vehicle speed, and then the speed as a bus signal being available to the ACM

• Hysteresis is where output depends on both past and present input

• While hysteresis may include some latency, “history dependence” (in this context let’s say bus signal prioritization or previous signal sent)

• i.e.: a signal that the speed has increased but not enough to warrant a new speed value signal being sent out on the bus or where there has to be a change (i.e.: brake switch OFF to ON) before a new signal

• Where user interface lags behind user input or other events

• A signal from the ABS module for “speed, vehicle indicated” isn’t reflected on a digital speedometer display “at the same time” as it’s sent from the ABS module if the instrument cluster is prioritizing other display functions

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

558

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Asynchronous data example

• With higher frequency capture, the lack of synchronicity between related data elements becomes easier to see • Here, samples are at every 80ms

• While there may be a percentage of brake application before the brake switch signal is transmitted…

• The brake pedal was depressed starting at about time -2.64 to -2.48s • Brake switch reported closed at time -2.48s • And the braking was identified later as “driver initiated” with the signal at -2.24s

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

559

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Asynchronous data example

• While related, these 3 signals are asynchronous • Imagine a sample of data captured at 500ms intervals was taken at time “-2.56s” • The brake pedal position would be >5% • The service brake would show “False” (“OFF”) • The “Driver initiated braking” would also show “False” (OFF)

• A half second later, at the next snapshot, the signals would appear “more synchronous” March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

560

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Asynchronous data example • Functions or activities are responsive to input and aren’t synchronized, so their signals aren’t synchronized, either • Of course, brake switch “on” doesn’t automatically mean 100% braking

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

561

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Data application considerations • Evaluating an approximate location at “impact” and/or Time Zero (T0) • Data reporting limits (the units and the resolution) • Steady state speed or acceleration before T0 • Consider the Pre-Crash data sample capture rate • Identifying the time between the “last sample before Time Zero” & T0 March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

562

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

The time between the “last sample before” & T0 • Working “backwards” from T0 using the Pre-Crash data for whatever the PreCrash data period is and understanding that the Pre-Crash snapshots or samples are supposed to be at regular intervals…

• Can that same regular time interval be assigned to the time between the last sample before T0 and T0 itself?

• i.e.: is the time between the last sample before T0 and T0 exactly 0.5 sec for a “49CFR563 compliant” system?

• Or… if the data translation report shows the last sample of Pre-Crash data labeled as “0 sec?” is that sample actually captured “at” T0?

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

563

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

The time between the “last sample before” & T0 • 49CFR563.7 Tables I and II call for Pre-Crash data elements to be reported…

• (1) relative to time zero and • (2) (from) “-5.0 to 0 sec”

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

564

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

The time between the “last sample before” & T0 • “Relative to” is often misinterpreted to mean Pre-Crash data is supposed to be captured at T0 • Remember, in 49CFR563 and the SAE J Standard there are three possibilities for when/how T0 is set, and none correspond to a Pre-Crash data sample being captured or called for T0 to be set as a function of a Pre-Crash data sample

• Almost all Data Limitations texts tell us: “…Pre-crash data is recorded at 2 samples per second within the 5 seconds before T0…”

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

565

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

For a Pre-Crash snapshot to be captured at T0…

• Wouldn’t the module have to know when T0 was going to occur to synchronize the capture of that snapshot of data at that moment?

• Wouldn’t that suggest that all the Pre-Crash data capture would have to be adjusted based on a prediction of a crash well over 5 seconds ahead of time to get the Pre-Crash samples set up to have the last one occur at T0?

• If that’s the case, why don’t we just make adjustments to avoid the crash in the first place?

• Given the definition(s) of T0, would a sample at T0 even still be considered “Pre-Crash” at that point?

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

566

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

The time between the “last sample before” & T0 • Not surprisingly, not every OEM captures or reports Pre-Crash data the same way • While still working to be interpretively compliant with 49CFR563

• While the time between snapshots is 500 ms (0.5 s) for 49CFR563 compliant systems, the time between the last sample captured before T0 and where the module sets T0 must be evaluated because that time must be part of a time and distance analysis • Key takeaway: not every OEM and not every separate OEM’s systems capture or report that last sample in the same way March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

567

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

GM “last sample” timing • GM systems that report Pre-Crash data captured at 1s intervals report the last sample as “-1s” and we find in the Data Limitations: • “…The 1.0 second Pre-crash data value (most recent recorded data point) is the data point last sampled before AE. That is to say, the last data point may have been captured just before AE but no more than 1.0 second before AE. All subsequent Pre-crash data values are referenced from this data point. …”

- 01029_SDMGT-2001 (emphasis added)

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

568

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

GM “last sample” timing • Where Pre-Crash data is captured at 0.5s intervals:

• “… Pre-Crash data is recorded asynchronously. The 0.5 second Pre-crash data value (most recent recorded data point) is the data point last sampled before Time Zero.

That is to say, the last data point may have been captured just before Time Zero but no more than 0.5 second before Time Zero. All subsequent Pre-crash data values are referenced from this data point.…”

- 01050_SDM30-delphi (emphasis added)

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

569

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

GM “last sample” timing • We know the time range for the last sample before T0 but not the specific time

1.0sec

“… All subsequent Precrash data values are referenced from this data point. ....”

1.0sec

0.5sec

“… no more than 1.0 second before AE. …”

AE/Algorithm Enable ≡ “Time Zero” March 10-12, 2025

0.5sec

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

“… no more than 0.5 seconds before Time Zero. …”

570

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Pre-Crash data from most other OEMs • Most other OEMs Pre-Crash data timing is comparable to the “-0.5 to -5.0s” GM type system(s) except for the time series numbering • Most of the other OEMs identify the last sample before T0 as “0.0 (sec)” because:

- 49CFR563 - Event Data Recorders

• BUT there are exceptions including a newer GM system and most don’t identify the time between the last sample an T0, however, some do…

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

571

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

(some) German OEMs “last sample timing” detail • “… Pre-Crash Data:

• - Pre-Crash Data is recorded at 2 samples per second starting 5 seconds before t0. …

• - Recorded Pre-Crash Data have a time resolution of 500ms. This can cause a possible delay of - 0803_BMW_ACSM4i the collected data up to 500ms. …”

• “…The data element "Time from Last Speed Data Sample (Precrash) to Time Zero“ indicates the time delay between the most recent pre-crash data sample and Time - 13001_VWG1000CO Zero (0 to 500ms). …”

• “…The data element "Time from Last Speed Data Sample (Precrash) to Time Zero“ indicates the time delay between the most recent pre-crash data sample and Time Zero (0 to 500ms). The reported time in this element has to be subtrated from - (sic) 14002_VWG2100CO (emphasis added) 500ms in order to obtain the correct time. …”

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

572

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

BMW last sample before T0 timing example • Time from last sample is given as 19 ms

• The Pre-Crash data marked as “0.0(sec)” was captured 19 ms before T0

• The Pre-Crash data marked as “-0.5 (sec)” is 500 ms older than the “0.0” data making it 519 ms old when T0 is set • Older data frames are 500ms older than the one at “-0.5 (sec)”

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

573

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

(some) German OEMs “last sample timing” detail

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

574

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Variants for Toyota Pre-Crash data capture • “Pre-563” Toyota systems (00EDR / 02EDR / 04EDR / 06EDR / 10EDR)

• 5 samples of Pre-Crash data captured every 1 sec • The last sample before TRG/T0 is reported with a “Time from Pre-Crash to TRG“ element indicating how long it had been in EDR memory pre-TRG (T0) with 100 – 102.4 ms resolution • A separate Pre-Crash snapshot captured within the last 100 ms of T0 and marked as “0 TRG” in the Pre-Crash data table

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

575

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

“Pre-563” (00EDR / 02EDR / 04EDR / 06EDR / 10EDR) “… Resolution of the last sample identified with the "Time from Pre-Crash to TRG" is 100[ms] or 102.4[ms] for ECUs with 1.024 data sampling intervals, and the value is rounded down and recorded. …” -05002_ToyotaTRW

4 samples captured every 1s referenced to the “last sample” before TRG

Here -0.8(sec) identifies a sample that has been in memory for between 800 and 900ms at TRG (T0). The displayed -0.8s time “… is rounded down and recorded…”

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

A separate snapshot captured within the last 100ms of TRG/T0

576

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Variants for Toyota Pre-Crash data capture • “563 compliant” (12EDR / 13EDR / 15EDR / 17EDR / 19EDR / 21EDR / 22EDR / 23EDR / 24EDR) • 10 samples of Pre-Crash data captured every 0.5 sec

• “… Resolution of the "Time from Pre-Crash to TRG" is 50 [ms], and the value is rounded up and recorded. … A separate Pre-Crash snapshot captured within the last -05013_ToyotaS00std 50 ms of T0 and marked as “0 TRG” in the Pre-Crash data table. …”

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

577

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

“Pre-563” (00EDR / 02EDR / 04EDR / 06EDR / 10EDR) “… Resolution of the "Time from Pre-Crash to TRG" is 50 [ms], and the value is rounded up and recorded. …”

-05013_ToyotaS00std

9 samples captured every 500ms referenced to the “last sample” before TRG

Here -0.15(sec) identifies a sample that has been in memory for between 100 and 150ms at TRG (T0). The displayed 0.15s time “… is rounded up and recorded…”

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

“… A separate Pre-Crash snapshot captured within the last 50ms of T0 and marked as “0 TRG” in the Pre-Crash data table. …”

578

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Variants for Toyota Pre-Crash data reporting “Time from Pre-Crash to TRG” Less than 1000ms, here btn 800-900ms

1.0sec

“Time from PreCrash to TRG” Less than 500ms, here btn 200-250ms

TRG / T0

Less than 100ms

Less than 50ms

0.5sec March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

579

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

GM “last sample” timing (SDM50) • “…Pre-Crash data samples are captured prior to Time Zero … at 500 millisecond intervals with an additional sample captured at Time Zero (referred as 0.0 second sample). …

• … The -0.5 second Pre-Crash sample (most recent recorded data point) is sampled within 500 milliseconds prior to Time Zero. All other PreCrash samples are referenced from this data point. …

• … Additionally, the data point sampled at 0.0 second is captured within 100 milliseconds prior to Time Zero. …”

- 01065_SDM50-veoneer (emphasis added)

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

580

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

GM “last sample” timing (SDM50) • “…Pre-Crash data samples are captured prior to Time Zero … at 500 millisecond intervals with an additional sample captured at Time Zero (referred as 0.0 second sample). …

• … The -0.5 second Pre-Crash sample (most recent recorded data point) is sampled within 500 milliseconds prior to Time Zero. All other PreCrash samples are referenced from this data point. …

• … Additionally, the data point sampled at 0.0 second is captured within 100 milliseconds prior to Time Zero. …”

0.5sec

0.5sec

“Time Zero” - 01065_SDM50-veoneer (emphasis added)

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

581

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

GM “last sample” timing (SDM50) • IF “…Pre-Crash data samples are captured prior to Time Zero … at 500 millisecond intervals …

• “… -0.5 second Pre-Crash sample (most recent recorded data point) is sampled within 500 milliseconds prior to Time Zero …

• “…All other Pre-Crash samples are referenced from this data point …

• “… Additionally, the data point sampled at 0.0 second is captured within 100 milliseconds prior to Time Zero. …”

• The “0.0” sample is captured within the last 100ms between the “-0.5s” sample and T0

0.5sec

0.5sec

“Time Zero” - 01065_SDM50-veoneer (emphasis added)

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

582

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

The Honda “0.0” sample • “… Pre-crash data is recorded at 2 samples per second within the 5 seconds before T0. The sampling point at 0.0 is taken at T0 and is asynchronous with the other sample points. Time between -0.5 and Time zero is given and is between 1 and 500ms. …”

- (emphasis added)

• Found in the Data Limitations for Honda systems identified by the codes • 04001_HondaSRS_GEN1 • 04003_HondaSRS_GEN3

04002_HondaSRS_GEN2 04004_HondaSRS_GEN4

• The time “is given?”

• There is no element like that seen in the German cars for the specific time from the last sample to T0 March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

583

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

The Honda “0.0” sample • “… The sampling point at 0.0 is taken at T0 and is asynchronous with the other sample points. Time between -0.5 and Time zero is given and is - (emphasis added) between 1 and 500ms. …”

• How do does that align with the notation on the Pre-Crash data table?

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

584

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

The Honda “0.0” sample • “… The sampling point at 0.0 is taken at T0 and is asynchronous with the other sample points. Time between -0.5 and Time zero is given and is between 1 and 500ms. …”

- (emphasis added)

• How can a sample be taken “at” T0?

• Wouldn’t the module (a) have to know when T0 was going to occur ahead of time and (b) which conditions would be met in that crash at T0 to be able to capture that snapshot of data at T0?

• So, in reality, wouldn’t there necessarily be a programming delay that reads something like…

• Sense crash • Work on protecting the occupants • Capture one more frame of external data and we’ll call it the 0.0 sample • But the capture is really after T0 at that point

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

585

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Honda “Pre-Crash” timing • If the “-0.5s” sample was taken closer to 500ms before T0 • Then the ACM set T0 after a relative longer time (i.e.: an underride) • Then another capture of “Pre-Crash” data was taken after T0 • For a time & distance analysis, can we use the 0.0 data set as “Pre-Crash”?

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

586

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Honda “Pre-Crash” timing • Even if the “0.0” sample is captured before T0 (using the GM SDM50 or Toyota systems for comparison) wouldn’t that “0.0” sample be within the period between the “-0.5s” sample and T0?

• So would we use it “again” in a time and distance analysis?

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

587

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Last sample before T0 timing application • The examples show the various ways the last sample or last couple of samples before or around T0 are captured by the various OEMs • Use case 1: where the last sample (whether marked -1(s), -0.5(s), or 0.0) is affirmatively captured before T0, it can be used in a T&D analysis • i.e.: GM, Ford, the German modules (especially where we know the time)

• Use case 2: where the last sample (0.0 or “0.0 TRG”) is taken within the time for the previous normal interval sample (or potentially after T0) it should be left out of the T&D analysis March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

588

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

March 10-12, 2025

Methodology Time and position analysis using Pre-Crash data relative to Time Zero

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

589

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Methodology – Anyone can “do the math” • The question is: to make the analysis meaningful, what are the limits or restrictions on the input data/information that would be used in the math to make calculated values useful?

• What was covered so far took a deeper look at the variability of the input values • Mainly associated with the use of the Pre-Crash “Speed, vehicle indicated” • Sample timing relative to T0 and which samples might not be useful/appropriate

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

590

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Methodology – “You do you” • Of course, no one is in a position to dictate the mechanics of how you choose to “do the math” but, based on what we know about the data, there are some reasoned recommendations that can be made • We should want to minimize uncertainty • This applies to both speed and time inputs

• We should want the mechanics of the calculations as easy as possible

• As with minimizing uncertainty, the least number of conversions would be ideal

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

591

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Methodology – Establish a frame of reference • “Points of impact” are rarely (if ever) “points” – generally more like areas • How big the area is will be entirely case dependent

• Where the car is over the ground at T0 – separate from an “area of impact” – is virtually impossible to (precisely) pin down • Since the common frame of reference in a set of data is relative to T0, the recommendation is to calculate distances with an understanding that they’re relative to wherever T0 is and that has to be approximated back to

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

592

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Methodology – “Speed, Vehicle Indicated” • Use the data in the least rounded, least converted resolution available • Normally the reported speed in km/h

• Complete the calculations using the speed in metric to a distance in metric first • If you’re using Imperial, make the distance conversion once to Imperial • Most of the time, the data we’ll work with will be available from the Bosch CDR Tool in a CSV export and that output is usually metric (km/h) March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

593

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Methodology – Time • This might be seen as twofold: 1. What time samples (data frames) should I use?

• And which should I eliminate?

2. Knowing the sample rate for most of the samples but realizing the time from the last sample before T0 is a “moving target,” what is the best way to take into account the variability?

• Apart from those German systems where we are given that specific time

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

594

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Methodology – work smarter not harder • Creating a spreadsheet to calculate distance based on data from a data translation report is going be the quickest way to use the appropriate data for a time and distance analysis • Given the variations in the time between the main data samples not to mention the variability of the time between the last sample and T0, using a spreadsheet means you eliminate the repeated calculations and reduce error • Assuming you set up the spreadsheet correctly

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

595

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Basic spreadsheet example • This basic spreadsheet layout allows for the speeds (in km/h) from EDR data to be pasted into Column B, cells B3 through B13 • The sheet then calculates the distance back from each sample assuming • The “0” sample is 0 ms at T0 • The “0” sample is 0.5 s before T0 • The “0” sample is 0.25 s before T0 • An average based on the average of the speeds entered March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

596

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

The average distance for the last sample before T0, the equation in cell C13 is: ((B13(Speedkm/h)) / (18/5)) * 0.25(sec) 18/5 converts km/h to m/s without rounding 0.25s assumes half the 0.5s time between “0” and T0 March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

597

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

The average distance moved in each time interval, the equation in cells C12 up to C3 is: (((B12/(18/5)) + (B13/(18/5))) /2 ) *0.5 Adjust the reference for two sequential data frames Takes the average of the speeds reported for two consecutive samples March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

598

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

The distance for the last sample before T0 assuming it is captured at T0 (time is 0s), the equation in cell D13 is: ((B13/(18/5)) /2 )*0 March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

599

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

The distance moved in each time interval assuming the time is 0.5s, the equation in cells D12 up to D3: D13+C12 Adjust the reference for two sequential data frames The distance in Column C is added to the previous calculated distance in column D March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

600

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

The distance for the last sample before T0 assuming it is captured -0.5s before T0 (time is 0.499s), the equation in cell E13 is: 0 + (B13/(18/5)) *0.499 March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

601

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

The distance moved in each time interval assuming the time is 0.5s, the equation in cells E12 up to E3: E13+E12 Adjust the reference for two sequential data frames The distance in Column C is added to the previous calculated distance in column E March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

602

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Assume the time is from T0 at “0” to -5.0s, the total time is then 5.5 sec, this averages the speeds for the whole period and works a single calculation in cell E15: ((AVERAGE(B3:B13))/(18/5))*5.5 A “plausibility” check of sorts compared to the next calculation March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

603

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Assume the time is from “-0.05” before T0 to -5.0s, the total time is then 5.0 sec, this averages the speeds for the whole period and works a single calculation in cell E15: ((AVERAGE(B3:B13))/(18/5))*5.0 A “plausibility” check of sorts compared to the previous calculation March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

604

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Once all the metric calculations in columns C, D and E are complete, the calculated values in those columns are converted, once, from meters to feet meters to feet = meters *3.28083 March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

605

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

The sheet can be redesigned to use the known time from the “0” sample to T0 as reported in German OEM systems Entering the reported time in Cell B15 is then used instead of an assumed time of 0 then another at -0.5s

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

606

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Summary • We took a deep look at the variability of the input values used in a set of time and distance calculations • We looked at ways to minimize introducing uncertainty into the calculations • Offered an approach that makes the mechanics of the calculations as easy as possible

• This can be adapted to the various time periods of data from 0 to 5, 8 or more seconds

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

610

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Easy Video and Image Analysis.

Interactively orthorectify and overlay your video on scene data for accurate vehicle speed or position measurements. Solve for camera positions. You can even project images and video back into your scene and do 3D object overlays for more complex analyses. The process is quick and easy!

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Bosch CDR DLC Tool Kit

The Bosch CDR DLC Tool Kit contains all hardware required to perform a DLC/OBD retrieval of EDR data supported by the Bosch CDR 900 VCI as stated in the Bosch CDR Help File. This package also includes a 1-year Bosch CDR software license.

The Bosch CDR DLC Tool Kit currently supports the largest number of vehicle manufacturers in North America.

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Nondestructive Data Retrieval From Damaged Modules Andrew Metanias Explico

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

611

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Andrew Metanias • Accident Reconstructionist at Explico • BSME from the University of Colorado

• Specialized in vehicle dynamics including suspension and brake design and autonomous vehicle development

• Experience in automotive electronics and management systems including work with control module programming and data analysis

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

612

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

My First Damaged ACM that Prompted my Research

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

614

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Removing the ACM from the Vehicle was my Favorite Part!

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

615

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Could the Crash Data be Retrieved?

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

616

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Problem Nondestructive data retrieval from damaged modules

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

617

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Data Retrieval Requires a Delicate Process

• Difficulty of swapping chips?

• Can a chip swap be performed on any ACM?

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

618

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Drawbacks to Chip-Swapping Modules

1. Risk of Damage March 10-12, 2025

2. Cost of Time

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

3. Preservation of Evidence 619

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Solution Nondestructive data retrieval from damaged modules

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

620

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Introducing Two Methods to Safely Retrieve Data

1. Creating a Bridge

March 10-12, 2025

2. The Virtual Chip Swap

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

621

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Proof of concept #1 Nondestructive data retrieval from damaged modules

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

622

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Method #1: Transferring Data Over the Bridge • Does not require soldering on either board • The only imaging tool needed is the Bosch CDR Tool • Once setup, data retrieval is as quick as a direct-to-module download

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

623

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

GM Gen 3 SDMs 2006 and 2008 Chevrolet Impalas

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

624

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Imaging modules with the CDR to Create a Baseline

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

625

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Opening Module to Access the Circuit Board

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

626

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Inspecting the Board Identifying Location of EEPROM Chip

March 10-12, 2025

8-Pin EEPROM Chip Containing Crash Data

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

627

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Procedure 1. Do not remove the chip from the subject board! Only remove the chip from the surrogate board.

2. Place the subject and surrogate board side by side.

Connect the Bosch CDR D2M cable to the surrogate board.

3. Place probes onto all 8 pins on the subject EEPROM chip.

4. Bridge the wire leads from one set of probes to the other.

5. On the 2nd MAG Bench, place the probes onto the same connections on the surrogate board.

6. Image the surrogate module with the Bosch CDR Tool.

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

628

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Step 1: Preparing Surrogate Module ACM-1-B is the Surrogate Module that will be Used as the Bridge

March 10-12, 2025

Preparing ACM-1-B for EEPROM Chip Removal

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

629

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Step 1: Removing Chip from Surrogate Module

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

630

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Surrogate Module Ready for Data Transfer EEPROM Chip Removed

March 10-12, 2025

ACM-1-B Ready for the Bridge Connection

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

631

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Step 2: Positioning Boards and Connecting D2M Cable

Subject Module (Left) and Surrogate Module with Chip Removed (Right) March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

632

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Retrieving Data Through the Bridge

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

633

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Step 3: Placing Probes on Subject EEPROM Chip

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

634

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

EEPROM Pin Numbers

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

635

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Probes Placed on Subject EEPROM Pins

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

636

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Step 4: Creating the Data Transfer Bridge Bridging Probes Together

March 10-12, 2025

Probe to EEPROM Pin # is Kept the Same

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

637

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Step 5: Placing Probes on Empty EEPROM Pin Locations

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

638

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Step 6: Imaging the Surrogate Module with the CDR Surrogate Module (ACM-1-B) Connected to CANplus via the D2M Cable

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

639

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Can Problems Arise from Using This Method?

2006 Chevrolet Impala

2008 Chevrolet Impala

These modules had different part numbers March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

640

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Comparison of CDR Reports ACM-1-A Baseline

ACM-1-A Bridged Through ACM-1-B

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

641

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Comparison of CDR Reports ACM-1-A Baseline

March 10-12, 2025

ACM-1-A Bridged Through ACM-1-B

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

642

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Comparison of CDR Reports ACM-1-A Baseline

March 10-12, 2025

ACM-1-A Bridged Through ACM-1-B

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

643

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

This was Performed Again with ACM-1-C

2008 Chevrolet Impala

2008 Chevrolet Impala

These modules had matching part numbers March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

644

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Comparison of CDR Reports ACM-1-C Baseline

ACM-1-C Bridged Through ACM-1-B

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

645

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Comparison of CDR Reports ACM-1-C Baseline

March 10-12, 2025

ACM-1-C Bridged Through ACM-1-B

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

646

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Comparison of CDR Reports ACM-1-C Baseline

March 10-12, 2025

ACM-1-C Bridged Through ACM-1-B

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

647

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Sanity Check – Does the Data Match the Damage?

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

648

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Subject Vehicle (ACM-1-C)

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

649

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Importance of Using Modules with the Same Part Number

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

650

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Proof of concept #2 Nondestructive data retrieval from damaged modules

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

651

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Method #2: The Virtual Chip Swap • This is a data transfer.

• Does not require chip removal or soldering.

• Can be performed on any type of chip that contains an EEPROM storage.

• The preferred method for retrieving crash data from larger chips.

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

652

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Toyota 17EDR ACMs 2018 and 2021 Toyota Tundra’s

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

653

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Imaging modules with the CDR to Create a Baseline

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

654

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Opening Module and Identifying Chip

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

655

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

144-Pin Microcontroller with Internal EEPROM

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

656

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Procedure 1. Do not remove the chip from the board! Instead, use probes to connect a chip reader to the right pins.

2. Retrieve the crash data from the internal EEPROM. 3. No changes have been made to the subject module. Seal the subject module back into evidence and place the surrogate module into the MAG Bench station.

4. Place the probes onto the same pins on the surrogate board.

5. Transfer the crash data from the subject module to the surrogate module.

6. Image the surrogate module with the Bosch CDR Tool.

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

657

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Infineon TC234L-32F Pinout for Data Retrieval

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

658

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Step 1: Placing Probes on Specified Pins

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

659

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

An Easier Method to Connect to the Same Pins

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

660

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Placing Probes on Remote Pin Locations

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

661

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Connecting Probe Leads to Chip Reader

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

662

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Step 2: Reading Subject ACM-4-B Internal EEPROM (D-Flash)

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

663

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Step 3: Placing the Subject Module Back Into Evidence

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

664

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Step 4: Placing Probes on the Same Pins on the Surrogate Board

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

665

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Step 5: Transfer the subject crash data to the surrogate module.

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

666

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Step 6: Re-Imaging ACM-4-A with the CDR

The data should now align with the baseline download of ACM-4-B

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

667

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Comparison of CDR Reports ACM-4-B Baseline

ACM-4-A with Virtual Chip Swap from ACM-4-B

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

668

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Comparison of CDR Reports

ACM-4-B Baseline

March 10-12, 2025

ACM-4-A with Virtual Chip Swap from ACM-4-B

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

669

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Comparison of CDR Reports

ACM-4-B Baseline March 10-12, 2025

ACM-4-A with Virtual Chip Swap from ACM-4-B

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

670

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Sanity Check – Does the Data Match the Damage?

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

671

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Subject Vehicle (ACM-4-B)

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

672

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Questions?

Andrew Metanias ametanias@explico.com 720-822-7589

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

673

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

PREMIUM SUMMIT SPONSOR

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

How AI will play a role in cars, crash investigation and data analysis Jason Kuter

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

674

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Agenda Items • AI in Automotive Safety • AI in Data Analysis • Impact of AI on Investigations • Case Studies • Ethical and Legal Considerations • Demos • The Future is now

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

675

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Sensors: Eyes and Ears of Modern Cars Role of Sensors Sensors in modern cars serve as the essential components that perceive the environment, ensuring improved safety and performance.

Real-time Data Collection These sensors collect real-time data which helps in making immediate driving decisions, enhancing overall safety for occupants.

Safer Driving Experience The integration of sensors in vehicles contributes significantly to creating safer driving experiences by reducing the chances of accidents.

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

676

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Predictive Safety: Preventing Accidents Before They Happen AI Hazard Prediction Advanced AI algorithms analyze real-time data from vehicle sensors to identify potential hazards on the road.

Proactive Safety Measures By predicting hazards, vehicles can engage proactive safety measures, reducing the likelihood of accidents.

Reducing Road Incidents The aim of predictive safety technology is to significantly decrease road incidents and enhance overall traffic safety.

This Photo by Unknown Author is licensed under CC BY-NC-ND

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

677

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Real-Time Decision-Making: Tesla Autopilot AI in Autopilot Tesla's Autopilot system utilizes advanced AI algorithms to make decisions in real-time, enhancing driving safety.

Complex Environment Navigation The system is designed to navigate complex driving environments autonomously, improving traffic flow and safety.

Safety and Efficiency Tesla's Autopilot enhances both safety and efficiency while driving, making it a revolutionary advancement in automotive technology.

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

678

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Spotting Hidden Trends: AI's Detective Work Data Analysis Capabilities AI excels at analyzing large datasets quickly, uncovering hidden patterns and potential risk factors for crashes.

Identifying Risk Factors By spotting trends in data, AI can predict risk factors, thereby enhancing preventative measures for road safety.

Enhancing Road Safety The insights gained from AI's detective work are crucial for implementing strategies that improve overall road safety.

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

679

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Real-World Applications: How AI Changes the Game Enhanced Crash Investigations AI technologies are revolutionizing crash investigations by analyzing data quickly and accurately, improving outcomes.

Improved Safety Protocols The implementation of AI in safety protocols helps in identifying risks faster and developing effective solutions.

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

680

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Positive Impacts • Improved Accuracy & Objectivity • AI enhances accuracy by removing human subjectivity • Provides objective assessment by relying on data and algorithms • Consistent and reproducible results increase credibility • Precise measurement of key details like speed changes and timing • Speed and Efficiency • AI processes data in minutes or hours, shortening investigation timelines • Faster analysis leads to quicker resolutions in insurance claims or court cases • Automates time-consuming tasks, freeing up investigators' time • Handles vast datasets quickly, integrating data from multiple sources • Ability to Handle Complexity • Consistent Analysis

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

681

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Negative Impacts • Potential Bias in Algorithms • AI can introduce algorithmic bias from historical data • Under-represented crash scenarios may lead to inaccuracies • Importance of training AI on diverse, representative data • Transparency in AI is crucial for understanding limitations • Ethical Concerns • Accountability for AI decisions • Explainability of AI conclusions • Risk of over-reliance on AI leading to missed errors • Automation bias can cause overlooking common-sense explanations • Dependence and Skill Erosion This Photo by Unknown Author is licensed under CC BY-NC-ND

March 10-12, 2025

• Industry Resistance

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

682

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Toyota’s Event Data Recorder (EDR)

Equipped in Modern Toyota Vehicles

Data Captured by EDR

Objective Snapshot of Collision

Part of the Airbag Control Module

Pre-crash data: vehicle speed, engine RPM, throttle position, brake on/off

Records moments before and during impact

Post-crash data: crash forces, airbag deployment info

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Provides critical data for analysis

683

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Case Study: Toyota EDR Data & Trigger Counts

Event Data Recorder (EDR) in Toyota Vehicles

Understanding Trigger Counts

Invalid or N/A Trigger Counts

Records critical data before and during a crash

Indicates the number or sequence of recorded events

Occurs when EDR does not assign a valid event number

Captures pre-crash data like speed, engine RPM, throttle position

Helps identify data from primary and secondary impacts

Could be due to power loss or unregistered events Data still recorded but ordering label is missing

Records post-crash data such as crash forces and airbag deployment

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

684

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Rear-End Collision – Braking Dispute • Incident Overview • Rear-end collision in Chicago • Defendant claimed the car ahead stopped abruptly • EDR Data Analysis • EDR data pulled from both vehicles • Plaintiff’s car showed normal braking and speed below limit • Defendant’s car showed speeding and late braking • Outcome • EDR evidence disproved defendant’s story • Established tailing driver’s negligence • Favorable settlement for the plaintiff

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

685

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Multi-Vehicle Pileup – Sequence of Impacts • Accident Overview • Multi-car accident on an interstate • Drivers blamed each other • Middle Driver's Claim • Claimed to be at a complete stop • Hit from behind and pushed into the vehicle in front • EDR Data Revelation • Recorded the car was moving at a steady speed • Brakes were never applied before the impact • Outcome • Investigators clarified the chain-reaction • Middle driver was still moving and did not brake

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

686

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Pedestrian Accident – Driver’s Reaction Time • Incident Overview • Vehicle struck a pedestrian in Evanston • Driver claimed pedestrian darted out suddenly • EDR Evidence • Vehicle was 15 mph over speed limit before impact • Driver hit brakes only half a second before collision • Contradiction of Driver's Claim • EDR data showed driver was not attentive • Outcome • Data strengthened pedestrian’s case • Substantial settlement based on EDR readout

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

687

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

AI Techniques for EDR Data Analysis

Machine Learning Algorithms Reconstructing Crash Scenarios

Anomaly Detection • Identify data points that deviate from normal expectations • Spot impossible values or inconsistent readings

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

• Learn from historical crash data to make predictions or classifications • Classify crash types or predict outcomes using EDR inputs • Recognize patterns, predict vehicle trajectories, and simulate crash scenarios

Pattern Recognition • Find correlations between different sensor readings • Identify anomalies in data patterns • Compare new crash data to known patterns

688

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

AI’s Influence in Case Analysis • AI Enhancements in Case Analysis • Synchronizes and analyzes data from multiple vehicles' EDRs • Reconstructs timelines of complex multi-vehicle scenarios • Incorporation of Additional Data • Combines EDR data with traffic cameras and roadway conditions • Example: AI tool combining EDR data with video analysis in a rear-end collision • AI in Legal Cases • AI-driven crash analysis influencing court outcomes • Use of AI-based accident reconstruction software by investigators and lawyers • Advanced Analyses and Visual Evidence • Creation of 3D animated re-enactments • Validation and Practical Impact

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

689

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Ethical Considerations: Will AI Testify in Court?

AI in Legal Scenarios The integration of AI into legal contexts presents various ethical dilemmas that need careful consideration.

Admissibility of AI Evidence We must examine whether evidence generated by AI can be considered reliable and admissible in court.

Implications of AI Testimony The potential for AI to testify in court raises questions about accountability and the future of legal proceedings.

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

690

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Debate: AI’s Role in Legal Scenarios AI in the Judicial Process AI is increasingly being integrated into the judicial process, providing tools for case analysis and decision-making.

Pros of AI Involvement Proponents argue that AI can enhance efficiency and accuracy in legal decision-making, reducing human bias.

Cons of AI Involvement Critics warn that AI may perpetuate existing biases and lack the nuanced understanding necessary for legal judgments.

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

691

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Demo Hands-On Activity Audience AI Demo Collaborative Input Help me create a video AI Development Deepseek, ChatGPT Research, Gemini NtebookLM

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

692

The Future of Crash Investigation: What’s Next? (c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

AI Integration Incorporating AI into crash investigation processes will enable quicker data analysis and improved accuracy in identifying causes.

Advancements in Technology The future will likely bring new technological advancements that enhance our understanding of crash dynamics and factors.

Impact on Results Faster and more accurate results from crash investigations will lead to better safety protocols and reduced accidents.

Humans will be “in the loop” For some time humans will be in the loop but this will reduce over time and more quickly than other technological booms. If we can automate we will.

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

693

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Action Plan for Professionals • Start Small and Familiarize • Begin with past cases to understand AI performance • Engage with Professional Communities • Join workshops and share experiences • Adhere to Ethical Guidelines • Use AI to supplement, not override expertise • Maintain transparency in reports March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

694

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Conclusion Revolutionizing Crash Reconstruction AI technology can significantly enhance the accuracy and efficiency of crash reconstruction and analysis.

March 10-12, 2025

Data Interpretation Insights

Ethical Considerations

With AI, we can interpret vast amounts of data more effectively, providing valuable insights into crash dynamics.

As we adopt AI, addressing the ethical implications is crucial to ensure responsible usage and decision-making.

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

695

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Pedestrian Data from Toyota, Subaru and GM PPM/PedPro/Ped Event Systems W. R. Rusty Haight Collision Safety Institute

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

696

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Data associated with pedestrian events Retrievable ped-specific “EDR data” • GM PedPro events • Lexus Pedestrian Protection module (PPM) events • Subaru Pedestrian event records

March 10-12, 2025

Other data associated with a ped impact • GM FCM Pedestrian Warning and Pedestrian Braking events • Toyota Techstream (Safety Sense) retrieved events involving pedestrians • Recorded events which don’t meet the “normal” 49CFR563 8km/h (5mph) delta-V recording threshold

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

697

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

March 10-12, 2025

Detection or protection?

Pedestrian Data from Toyota, Subaru and GM PPM/PedPro/Ped Event Systems

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

698

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

First, they are different terms Pedestrian Detection • Active safety system/components

Pedestrian Protection • Passive safety systems/components

• Systems designed to detect pedestrians in or near the road pre-impact and help drivers either avoid the collision or slow significantly before a collision

• Systems designed to detect pedestrian impacts within specific conditions and then activate components designed to minimize potential vehicle contact injury

• GM’s FCM • Subaru EyeSight • Ped detection driven AEB

March 10-12, 2025

• Head-to-hood • Adult leg/child size pedestrian to vehicle front facia

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

699

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Pedestrian detection • Detection might be captured as/to include “data” • GM FCM data • Toyota data using Techstream • Subaru EyeSight (?)

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

700

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Front Camera Module event types • “… The Front Camera Module (FCM) can record up to two events that include images. Event Recording is triggered by an “event of interest”. The following are possible “events of interest” that trigger event recording and are listed in the priority order from highest to lowest: Airbag Deployment Event Pretensioner Deployment Event Non-Deployment Event Pedestrian Braking Collision Imminent Breaking (CIB) Pedestrian Warning Front Collision Alert Lane Departure Warning • If both event records are full, a new event can be stored if it is of a higher or equal priority than the priority of one of the currently recorded events. The new event would overwrite the lowest priority event but if both recorded events are of the same priority as the new event, the oldest event would be overwritten.…”

- 01073_FCM-MagnaGA3.0 (sic, emphasis added)

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

701

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Front Camera Module (FCM) ped data

March 10-12, 2025 702

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

702

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Detection may or may not include data Pedestrian Detection • Active safety system/components

Pedestrian Protection • Passive safety systems/components

• Systems designed to detect pedestrians in or near the road pre-impact and help drivers either avoid the collision or slow significantly before a collision

• Systems designed to detect pedestrian impacts within specific conditions and then activate components designed to minimize potential vehicle contact injury

• GM’s FCM • Subaru EyeSight • Ped detection driven AEB

March 10-12, 2025

• Head-to-hood • Adult leg/child size pedestrian to vehicle front facia

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

703

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

March 10-12, 2025

Pedestrian protection Pedestrian Data from Toyota, Subaru and GM PPM/PedPro/Ped Event Systems

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

704

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

“Vulnerable Road User” (VRU) protection • European New Car Assessment Program (EuroNCAP) • Introduced in 1997, last updated 2023

• Australasian ANCAP

• Follows ENCAP testing and results

• Japaneese JNCAP

• Test procedure created in 2003 • Testing done by Toyota in the late 1980’s

• Global GNCAP

• “SaferCarsFor___”

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

705

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

VRU protection testing • “… As well as assessing how well cars protect their occupants, Euro NCAP tests how well they protect those vulnerable road users – pedestrians and cyclists – with whom they might collide.

• In these tests, the potential risks of injuries to a pedestrian's head, pelvis, upper and lower leg are assessed. …”

-EURONCAP.com

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

706

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Pedestrian protection • From the late 1980s into the early 2000s

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

707

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Pedestrian protection • From the late 1980s into the early 2000s

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

708

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Pedestrian protection Hood lifters • Normally the system seen in north America • May also be found in other regions

March 10-12, 2025

Hood and lower windshield airbags • Not normally seen in North America • Typical in Japan and Europe

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

709

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Pedestrian protection

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

710

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Wrap Around Distance – “WAD” • Wrap Around Distance is used to describe the way a body “wraps around” the front of the car and then where the head is likely to impact the hood/windshield area • Again, given a relationship between…

• Height of the ped’s center of mass • Height of the leading edge of the hood • Length of the hood and • Impact speed of the car

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

711

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Wrap Around Distance – “WAD” • Headform test zone WADs for EuNCAP testing

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

712

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Wrap Around Distance – “WAD”

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

713

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Predicting impact areas • Real limitations to the impact area on a car are not “just about speed” • Height of the ped’s center of mass • Height of the leading edge of the hood • Length of the hood and • Impact speed of the car

• Broadly predicting impact speed simply from an impact area is generally unreliable March 10-12, 2025

Pedestrian safety the identification of precipitating factors and possible countermeasures Snyder and Knolblauch 19971 Operations Research Report Number FH-11-7312 DOT

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

714

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

“WAD” and pedestrian protection

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

715

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

ENCAP pedestrian related tests

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

716

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

That covers hood impacts – what about the road impact?

Designing road vehicles for pedestrian protection, Crandall, J. e al, The British Medical Journal (2002)

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

717

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

The typical systems in North America Lexus

GM

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

718

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

GM “PedPro” system components • Diagnostics and deployment decision making at the ACM (SDM) • Sensing behind the front bumper energy absorption system • Lifter mechanisms under the hood • “Active Hood Deployment”

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

719

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

GM “PedPro” system components • Sensing behind the front bumper energy absorption system

March 10-12, 2025

• Lifter mechanisms under the hood • “Active Hood Deployment”

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

720

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Toyota “Pop Up Hood” system components • Sensing behind the front bumper energy absorption system • Lifter mechanisms under the hood • “Pop Up Hood” (PUH)

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

721

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Toyota “Pop Up Hood” system components

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

722

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Lexus PUH lifter assembly example

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

723

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Lexus PUH lifter assembly example

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

724

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Lexus PUH sensor assembly and dash light

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

725

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Not all MIL lamps are the same

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

726

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Not all MIL lamps are the same

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

727

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Where is the Lexus PPM data?

• Help file indicates one D2M cable for both the ACM and the PPM and specifies that the PPM data is stored in the ACM • Older systems are CanPlus or CDR 900 supported • Newer systems are CDR 900 and CDR2 supported

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

728

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Where is the Lexus PPM data?

• Help file indicates one D2M cable for both the ACM and the PPM and specifies that the PPM data is stored in the ACM • Older systems are CanPlus or CDR 900 supported • Newer systems are CDR 900 and CDR2 supported

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

729

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Lexus PPM or PUH • No matter what you call it, ped protection data is recorded in the ACM • It is a second separate download so only the ACM is needed for D2M access

• “… If Pop-Up Hood have operated or if Airbag for pedestrian have deployed, data will not be overwritten or deleted by the pedestrian protection ECU following that event. If Pop-Up Hood have not operated or if Airbag for pedestrian have not deployed, the data of that event may be overwritten by the subsequent events. …

• “… The pedestrian protection ECU has two recording pages (memory maps) – 05017PUH_ToyotaS00std to store Pop-Up Hood event data. …

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

730

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

March 10-12, 2025

Pedestrian event data Pedestrian Data from Toyota, Subaru and GM PPM/PedPro/Ped Event Systems

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

731

732

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

EDR data and pedestrian involved crashes • Currently, several North American OEMs provide access to pedestrian related EDR data using the Bosch CDR Tool for identified pedestrian related events • GM Pedestrian Protection (PedPro) events • GM Front Camera Module (FCM) • Toyota (Lexus) Pedestrian Protection Module (PPM) data for the Pop Up Hood pedestrian protection system (PUH) (second retrieval and CDRx file) • Subaru Pedestrian Crash records • Other OEMs may identify pedestrian related crashes without significant detail so far

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

732

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Examples of limited OEM data

• Mercedes

• BMW

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

733

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Chrysler: “first” in the CDR Tool but…

• Chrysler PPM systems currently listed starting in MY 2013

• Some older systems identified with potential pedestrian data prior to that now removed from the Help File listing

• Chrysler Coverage Note 13:

• “…Vehicles sold into US, Canada and Mexico markets are not equipped with Pedestrian Protection Modules (PPM). Vehicles sold in other markets (primarily in Europe) may be equipped with PPMs; however, the PPM tool bar icon in the CDR application may be active even if the vehicle is not equipped. In this case, users will need to determine whether or not the vehicle is equipped with a PPM before attempting image it for EDR data. …”

– Bosch CDR Tool Help file, Chrysler Coverage notes (emphasis added)

734

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

734

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Chrysler EU ped data: 03003_ChryslerEPPM • European model coverage (i.e.: Dodge Journey) • Three event record spaces • “… As the VIN may be used to determine the configuration of the restraint system, it is imperative that the correct VIN be entered into the CDR Tool during the imaging process. …”

• No delta-V, but includes front satellite sensor acceleration data • Pre-Crash data

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

735

Chrysler EU ped data

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

736

Chrysler EU ped data

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

737

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Subaru data: 22001_DL001 • “… The airbag ECU has two spaces for recording crash data. Regarding vehicles equipped with pedestrian protection devices, there is one dedicated area for recording data of crash with pedestrians, in addition to the above two recording areas. …”

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

738

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Subaru data: 22002_DL002 • “… The airbag ECU has two recording pages for each accident type: two pages for frontal and rear crash, two pages for a side crash, two pages for rollover event(*), and two pages for pedestrian crash(*). *if equipped. ...”

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

739

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Subaru Pedestrian Event data • Will normally have essentially “normal” pre-crash data but also post-crash speed and ped sensor data at higher resolution

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

740

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

March 10-12, 2025

GM PedPro data example Pedestrian Data from Toyota, Subaru and GM PPM/PedPro/Ped Event Systems

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

741

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

GM PedPro in the SDM40-conti • From the ACM, no separate download required

• System RPO is B3T (“HOOD ACTIVE, PEDESTRIAN PROTECTION”) • Camaro, some Cadillacs and the Regal and Lacrosse

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

742

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

GM PedPro in the SDM40-conti • No separate Data Limitations with the data set, it’s all from the ACM • “… There are two types of PedPro crash events. The first is the Non-Deployment PedPro Event. A Non-Deployment PedPro Event records data but does not deploy anything. A Non-Deployment PedPro Event may contain Pre-Crash and Crash data.

The second type of PedPro recorded crash event is the Deployment PedPro Event.

It also may contain Pre-Crash and Crash data. If two or more PedPro Events occur within 5 seconds of each other, the Pre-Crash data may be displayed as Data Not Available. Deployment Events cannot be overwritten or cleared by the SDM. • The SDM can store up to two PedPro Events. …”

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

– 01058_SDM40-conti

743

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

GM PedPro data example

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

744

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

GM PedPro data example • GM PedPro works between a low threshold “speed, vehicle indicated” and up to about 50km/h (~31mph) • ENCAP testing is done projecting 40km/h (25mph) • Below the “low speed threshold” there is no deployment/activation of the PedPro system – the low threshold is vehicle-specific • PedPro system is designed to not deploy in a “regular crash” • Detecting a crash is left to the ACM and ACM satellite accelerometers

• PedPro deployment doesn’t affect occupant protection (i.e.: driver airbag)

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

745

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

GM PedPro data example

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

746

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

GM PedPro data example

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

747

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

GM PedPro data example – Non-Deployment

Was the speed too high or too low?

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

748

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

“After PedPro Time Zero” Car’s right side

Car’s left side

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

749

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

“After PedPro Time Zero” • Pressure displayed at a 2ms capture/display rate in millibars (mbar) • Sensor 1 is on the car’s right side

Car’s right side

March 10-12, 2025

Car’s left side

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

750

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

“After PedPro Time Zero” • Pressure displayed at a 2ms capture/display rate in millibars (mbar) • Sensor 1 is on the car’s right side

• 1 mbar is ~0.015psi • Ambient air pressure at sea level is 1013.25mbar (~14.7psi)

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

751

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Where was the detected impact?

Car’s right side

Car’s left side

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

752

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Where was the detected impact?

Car’s right side

Car’s left side

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

753

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Now, what do you think happened?

The Buick is “#2”

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

754

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

But it wasn’t really a ped impact!!!

• No, but it was a scenario where the side impact didn’t meet a recording threshold so, had there not been a PedPro event recorded, we’d have no data at all!

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

755

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

But now we do have…

• Pre-crash data we wouldn’t have otherwise had lacking the PedPro capabilities of the regal with the SDM40-conti ACM

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

756

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

March 10-12, 2025

Lexus PPM data example #1 Pedestrian Data from Toyota, Subaru and GM PPM/PedPro/Ped Event Systems

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

757

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Lexus PPM example • Data as both ACM and PPM files but from the same physical module

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

758

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Specifics: ECU, ACM, EDR ACM data • Data Limitations 05017_ToyotaS00std • EDR Generation 17EDR • ECU Part Number 89170-50K80

March 10-12, 2025

PPM data • Data Limitations 05017PUH_ToyotaS00std • EDR Generation 17PUH • ECU Part Number 89970-50090

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

759

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Specifics: ECU, ACM, EDR ACM data • Data Limitations 05017_ToyotaS00std • EDR Generation 17EDR • ECU Part Number 89170-50K80

PPM data • Data Limitations 05017PUH_ToyotaS00std • EDR Generation 17PUH • ECU Part Number 89970-50090

“… In some cases, the [pedestrian protection or airbag] ECU part number printed on the ECU label may not match the pedestrian protection ECU part number that the CDR tool reports. The part number retrieved by the CDR tool should be considered as the official ECU part number. …”

- Data limitations for each unit (ECU - Electronic Control Unit) March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

760

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Lexus ACM vs PPM – are they “connected?”

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

761

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

First, some terms • “… "Trip count" indicates the number of ignition power applying to a vehicle.

The upper limit for the recorded value is 65534 times. When trip count reaches the upper limit value, trip count is reset at the next counting up. …”

– 05017PUH_ToyotaS00std and 05017_ToyotaS00std

• “… Ignition cycle, crash means the number (count) of power cycles applied to the recording device at the time when the crash event occurred since the first use of the EDR. …”

– 49CFR563.5 Definitions (emphasis added)

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

762

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

PPM events – are they connected?

PPM Most Recent Event • TRG Count (times) – 14 • Ignition Cycle, Crash (times) – 362 • Odometer signal (miles [km]) – 1,195 [1,923] • Trip count (times) – 401 • Time count (msec) – 187,200

March 10-12, 2025

PPM First Prior Event • TRG Count (times) – 1 • Ignition Cycle, Crash (times) – 353 • Odometer signal (miles [km]) – 1,195 [1,923] • Trip count (times) – 392 • Time count (msec) – 1,283,900

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

763

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

ACM and PPM events – are they connected?

ACM data • Most recent event

• TRG Count (times) – 3 • Ignition cycle (not recorded for Side events) • Odometer signal – (miles [km]) 1,195 [1,923] • Trip count (times) – 392 • Time count (msec) – 1,283,900

March 10-12, 2025

PPM data • Most Recent Event

• TRG Count (times) – 14 • Ignition Cycle, Crash (times) – 362 • Odometer signal (miles [km]) – 1,195 [1,923] • Trip count (times) – 401 • Time count (msec) – 187,200

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

764

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Lexus ACM vs PPM – are the “connected?”

• In chronological order

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

765

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Lexus ACM vs PPM – “the rest of the story…”

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

766

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Lexus ACM vs PPM – “the rest of the story…”

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

767

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Lexus ACM vs PPM – “the rest of the story…”

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

768

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Lexus ACM vs PPM – “the rest of the story…”

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

769

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Lexus PPM counters • 9 new ignition cycles and 9 new “tips” but 13 “triggers” • How many times was the pressure sensor “bumped?”

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

770

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

But it wasn’t really a “ped impact!!!” (again)

• No, it wasn’t but…

• Side events for the 17EDR (ACM) don’t record Pre-Crash (Rollover events do)

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

771

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

But it wasn’t really a “ped impact!!!” (again)

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

772

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Lexus ACM and PPM data together

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

773

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

March 10-12, 2025

Lexus PPM data example #1 Pedestrian Data from Toyota, Subaru and GM PPM/PedPro/Ped Event Systems

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

774

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Lexus PPM example • Data as both ACM and PPM files but from the same physical module

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

775

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Lexus ACM vs PPM – are they “connected?”

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

776

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Specifics: ECU, ACM, EDR ACM data • Data Limitations 05017_ToyotaS00std • EDR Generation 17EDR • ECU Part Number 89170-50K81

March 10-12, 2025

PPM data • Data Limitations 05017PUH_ToyotaS00std • EDR Generation 17PUH • ECU Part Number 89970-50200

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

777

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Specifics: ECU, ACM, EDR ACM data • Data Limitations 05017_ToyotaS00std • EDR Generation 17EDR • ECU Part Number 89170-50K81

PPM data • Data Limitations 05017PUH_ToyotaS00std • EDR Generation 17PUH • ECU Part Number 89970-50200

“… In some cases, the [pedestrian protection or airbag] ECU part number printed on the ECU label may not match the pedestrian protection ECU part number that the CDR tool reports. The part number retrieved by the CDR tool should be considered as the official ECU part number. …”

- Data limitations for each unit (ECU - Electronic Control Unit) March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

778

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Lexus ACM vs PPM – are the “connected?”

• In chronological order

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

779

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

The involved Lexus

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

780

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

The involved Lexus

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

781

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

The Lexus “Pre-Pedestrian Event” data

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

782

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

The Lexus “Pre-Pedestrian Event” data

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

783

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

The Lexus “Pre-Pedestrian Event” data

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

784

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

The Lexus “Pre-Pedestrian Event” data

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

785

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Lexus – anything else available?

• Vehicle Control History (“Techstream”) data

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

786

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

VCH for a “sudden braking event” ACM ECU Part Number 89170-50K81 Event mileage: 101,162 Key Cycle: 12870

Speed: 24km/h

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

787

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

VCH comparisons

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

788

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

VCH comparisons

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

789

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

VCH comparisons

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

790

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

The “picture worth 1000 words” – or about

…depending on billable hours…

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

791

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

March 10-12, 2025

Lexus ped impact example #2 Pedestrian Data from Toyota, Subaru and GM PPM/PedPro/Ped Event Systems

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

792

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

PPM in North America • A limited number of Lexus vehicles in North America have the PPM integrated in the ACM together with the hood actuators • But Safety Sense (Techstream) data may still capture pedestrian impacts • In photos • As events not directly identified as “pedestrian impacts”

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

793

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Pedestrian impacts in “Techstream” • Often found as Safety Sense/Techstream files associated with…

• Vehicle Behavior • Lane Keeping Assist (LKA)

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

794

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Pedestrian impacts in “Techstream” • Often found as Safety Sense/Techstream files associated with…

• Vehicle Behavior • Lane Keeping Assist (LKA)

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

795

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Pedestrian impacts in “Techstream” • Often found as Safety Sense/Techstream files associated with…

• Vehicle Behavior • Lane Keeping Assist (LKA)

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

796

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Pedestrian impacts in “Techstream” • Often found as Safety Sense/Techstream files associated with…

• Vehicle Behavior • Lane Keeping Assist (LKA)

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

797

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

798

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Summary • There is a growing pedestrian related EDR data available • Association with both pedestrian detection and pedestrian protection • Beyond core EDR data, there is the potential for data from other systems (i.e.: Toyota)

• As we’ve “lost” the “low speed” data we used to see (crashes with delta-Vs under 8km/h), some pedestrian related data may “pick up the slack” • “All” we have to do is remember that sometimes, the pedestrian related data may be a second, separate retrieval effort March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

799

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

W. R. Rusty Haight Collision Safety Institute www.collisionsafety.net 281 909 0745

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

800

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

“We use science to shine the light on truth, improving the world one person at a time.”

PREMIUM SUMMIT SPONSOR

EXPERTS in our

SERVICES

- Accident Reconstruction - Biomechanics - Construction Consulting - Digital Forensics - Animations & Graphics - Human Factors

- Product Liability - Premises Liability

March 10-12, 2025

102 EXPERT S

10

LOCATION S

8

SERVICES

The power of our collective is unmatched.

Check out our website to watch videos about each of our service lines and learn more about opportunities at Aperture!

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Private Investigator and expert witness licensing considerations with an eye on EDR data retrieval Michael R. Depew TCS Consulting

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

801

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

AGENDA

• Introduction • Decipher the Title and exact meaning • Issues we face for the future • Case study and How it applies to you • Summary & Questions – I am presenting today but I want to also open a conversation.

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

802

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Micheal R. Depew - TCS Consulting • Director at Large, Board member NCISS (The National Council of Investigation & Security Services)(This is not a Private Investigator group but a national advocacy for law that effect group such as ours – I am on the Legislation committee • Senior Dir at Large, Board Member & (Past)Treasurer PPIAC (State of Colorado) – I am on the Legislation committee • Former - Director at Large, Board Member (TALI) State Of Texas(Past)- I chaired the Legislation committee • Member of Council of Association Leaders (COAL) • Private/Legal Investigator - Texas C20493 • Private Investigator - Colorado PI2.394(Lic. Not Req)

• Texas Association of Accident Reconstruction Specialists (TAARS) • National Association of Professional Accident Reconstruction Specialists (NAPARS) • California Association of Accident Reconstruction Specialists (CARS) (CA2RS) • Associated Security Services & Investigators of Texas (ASSIST) • NALI – National Association of Legal Investigator • WAD – World Association of Detectives • Department of Defense (DOD) Certified in Reconstruction Investigations – CAGE #7VAJ8

• Private Investigator - Louisiana 9476-011519-LA

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

409-466-2439 Mike@TheCrashPro.com 803

803

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Congressman Jack Brooks – Served 42 years in Congress Brooks Act (1972)- Government Engineering Act NASA Houston Jefferson County Drainage District #7 – Modern Morval

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

804

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

This is the make up of our field

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

805

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

PI Licenses • How many people here hold a PI license?

• How many people here have a Texas PI license?

• How many people here that came from out of state to this conference?

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

806

806

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Title Break Down of our Title: • Private Investigator • Expert Witness • EDR Data Retrieval • Licensing - Little out order

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

807

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Let’s decipher the Title of This presentation • Private Investigator and expert witness licensing considerations with an eye on EDR data retrieval • Some time referred to a “Private Detective” • “Red Headed Stepchild” in our Field • What defines a Private Detective?

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

808

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

So, Let’s Talk about PI’s

What is a Private Investigator

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

809

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

If you ask most on the street you would get one answer catch cheaters

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

810

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Private Investigators Are:

• Just Like the title says– Investigators that are Private • Background checks • Surveillance • Fraud Investigations • Accident Reconstruction – “Accident Investigator” • Criminal investigations – Homicides – Sex Crimes • Corporate investigations • Data Forensics Investigations • Bug Sweeps “Technical Surveillance Countermeasures (TSCM)”

The biggest one here: Private Investigation Groups are the leading group for checking on laws that affect our line of work March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

811

Last Statement I don’t want to take anything away from the other organizations (c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

812

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Is Accident reconstruction Engineering?

Well Kind of Real Accident Reconstruction guy here

It is a lot of things Engineering- Mechanical & Electrical Drafting Photography Lots of Physics Computer modeling . . .

Accident Reconstruction is a small part of Engineering

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

813

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Let’s decipher the Title of This presentation • Private Investigator and expert witness licensing considerations with an eye on EDR data retrieval • You can have this on Both PI’s and AR’s

• You're the expert - you are the one sitting in the hot seat Infront of judge , jury & everyone watching.

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

814

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Pass Rules = Expert Federal Rule 702 (Also 703 & 704) • A witness who is qualified as an expert by knowledge, skill, experience, training, or education may testify in the form of an opinion or otherwise if…

• (a) The expert’s scientific, technical, or other specialized knowledge will help the trier of fact to understand the evidence or to determine a fact in issue; • (b) The testimony is based on sufficient facts or data; • (c) The testimony is the product of reliable principles and methods; and • (d) The expert has reliably applied the principles and methods to the facts of the case.

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

815

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Federal Rule 702 – made easy

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

816

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Daubert “Dol-Bert” Challenge- “Standard” • A Daubert challenge is a particular type of motion made to the judge either before or during litigation, in an effort to exclude the introduction of unqualified expert witness testimony to the judge or jury during trial.

• 1993 U.S. Supreme Court case Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc., 509 U.S. 579 (1993).

• The Daubert standard, based upon the decision reached by the Court in that case, provides criteria by which the trial judge may make a preliminary assessment of the admissibility of expert testimony presented in United States federal (and most state) legal proceedings.

• This decision is based on the validity of the methodology and scientific reasoning employed by the expert witness and whether this evidence can be appropriately applied to the facts of the case at issue.

• U.S. Federal Rule of Evidence 702, amended in response to Daubert

“Judge is the Gatekeeper” March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

817

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Texas Supreme Court – Robinson (TX 1995) • Robinson, 923 S.W. 2d 549 (1995), the Supreme Court of Texas adopted the reasoning of Daubert. The Court held that the proponent of expert testimony must show that the testimony is both relevant to the issues in the case and based upon a reliable foundation.

• Texas has its own version called the Robinson Standard. – The Texas Daubert • Just Like Daubert “Screening of your Testimony”

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

818

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Let’s decipher the Title of This presentation • Private Investigator and expert witness licensing considerations with an eye on EDR data retrieval What is EDR Data? – This where is can get complicated?

• EDR data = data -> EDR/ECM – Bendix System, Transmission Modules – I could go on for an hour of all the NEW data that is available to us. The Rules we will discuss is what muddies what defines PULLING EDR data • EDR data retrieval – HERE IS THE PROBLEM – Technology & Privacy Laws March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

819

Last but not least – Licensing What is Licensing?

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Licensing serves as a form of regulation by restricting the practice of certain occupations or activities to those who meet specific standards, ensuring public safety, and maintaining quality and ethical conduct 1. Public Protection 2. Regulation and Enforcement 3. Ensuring Competence 4. Maintaining Standards 5. Consumer Confidence March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

820

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Licensing Considerations

• For most types of Investigations in most states you have to a Private Investigations License.

• For Accident Reconstruction – Several way you can get there: Mentoring Degrees-Education (Most time education with mentoring) Public Side – Police/Government Many other ways but you must really pass the Rules we discussed earlier • These fields are crossing and will continue to do so in the future.

OUR FIELD IS EXPANDING

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

821

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Attorneys are demanding more out of US

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

822

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

THE IBM GUY

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

823

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Hate to be the Bearer of Bad NEWS! Our Industry is changing – Last 20 years Physics , calculations & Math stays the same Seems even the Highway Surface has stayed the same.

Safety Barriers, Break away poles are getting better - BUT Still the Same Even the weather So, What is Changing?

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

824

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Technology is Changing

Technology is here to stay If you have been to a conference in last 5 years you can see how much vehicles are changing for as Technology

Anyone pulled data from a 2002 chevy – yea 2 pages of data March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

825

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

EDR Data was NEVER supposed to be used by Private Sector

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

826

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

This has all been Introduced into our Field in last 20 Years are so • Cell phones connecting to Vehicles • EDR/ECM modules – More data than ever • GPS modules • Camera system – Vehicle – Front/Rear • Fuel tank modules • EDL – Electronic data logging – Replaces paper • Drones – Yes hard to think we have these to use now days • Remember this from Last year

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

827

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

828

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Sensors

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

829

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Becoming a Gateway of Data

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

830

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

March 10-12, 2025

With this Changing technology comes considerations for Privacy Laws

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

831

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Bills that have affected our field of work: • General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) of 2018 & California Consumer privacy Act (CCPA) of 2018 • HIPAA – Health Insurance Portability & Accountability Act – Yea we all dig through that vehicle like a mad man on a mission to find something to help our clients – HINT – Paperwork.

• Gramm-Leach-Bliley (GLBA) – Financial Services Modernization Act of 1999 • The U.S. Privacy Act of 1974 – Tricky one – Enacted to handle governmental data for citizen.

• Driver Privacy Act (2015) March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

832

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Federal Law: FTC (Federal Trade Commission) • The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) regulates the collection, use, and disclosure of vehicle data to protect consumers from unfair practices. The FTC has taken action against auto manufacturers for sharing driver behavior and geolocation data without consumers' consent

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

833

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

FTC laws for vehicle data • Consent - Companies must obtain consumers' consent before collecting vehicle data, with some exceptions.

• Data Access – Consumers must be able to request and delete their data and limit data collection.

• Data use – Companies can’t use sensitive data for automated decisions or share it with third parties without consumers’ consent • Data disclosure – Companies can’t disclose sensitive data to consumer reporting agencies without consumers’ consent • Data security – Companies must build safeguards to protect consumers from potential harm.

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

834

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

The FTC's actions against auto manufacturers include: • Prohibiting the disclosure of driver behavior and geolocation data to consumer reporting agencies • Requiring companies to obtain consent before collecting connected vehicle data • Giving consumers the ability to limit data collection • Emphasizing that geolocation data sales are subject to enhanced protections

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

835

Privacy LAWS – State by State/National (c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

This is why I mentioned some of these at the beginning of our conversation.

• California & Colorado – Lead to change privacy law.

• PPIAC – I am a board of directors for the state of Colorado and sit on the Legislative Committee • NCISS – I am a board of directors for the for the National Association and sit on the Legislative Committee – Will be In Washington DC at the capital in one week.

• Texas – Past board of directors for State of Texas for TALI and committee chair for legislative affairs with the State.

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

836

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

How the rules changes US as Expert Attorneys are well versed in the Rules Privacy Laws “Muddies” The rules

Muddy Rules are being Used Against US in Depositions & Court March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

837

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Texas - Private Investigations Laws • Occupations Code Chapter 1702 • Texas Administrative Code – Chapter 35 • In Texas if you owner/operator, you must have a “C” License “Company License” • If you are a Private investigator – You must have a “A” License • If you pull data in the State of Texas you have to have a “B” License • Here is the Kicker – You can have a “A” & “B” License, but you must be under someone with a “C” license – Like a Police officer that have his peace officer license, but he needs to be commissioned under the department that hires him.

Louisiana Is similar except they have an Agency License “Company” and a “Person License”

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

838

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Situation #1 • Problem: Accident Reconstruction expert is on vehicle inspection, but attorney will not allow him to pull data – States he is in violation of 1702 DPS code (Texas).

• I have asked many of the state to clarify what data can an Accident Reconstructionist / investigator pull without a PI license in that state. Most cannot right now but some have – I will use Texas Definition.

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

839

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Situation : #2 • Problem: You're on the scene and you are taken pictures of your accident location – You take a picture but some how you capture a person (Ms. Nesbit) sitting across street in the window sipping Tea. • You are going to Violate 1702 – You Might not even know it.

• Let just throw in Texas Penal Code Section 21.15 – Invasive visual Recording

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

840

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Situation #3 • Problem: You're Testifying in a Major Case. The opposing attorneys' states “Did you know you are in violation of the state PI codes since you pulled cell phone data from the vehicle module from the Vehicle” • Let’s Throw in dash camera data off vehicle or Data from a Grocery Store security system. If you are using it in an Investigative way, you must have a PI License – Police do not have this issue until they retire and go private.

• Without having a “B” License and commissioned under a “C” Company your testimony could go right out the door with your reputation.

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

841

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Example problems/Issues: #4 - HIPAA Brand NEW 2024 HIPAA laws – “Bonus” • Problem: You are out on the scene, and you see medical records laying in the floorboard that shows your client has prescriptions of medication. You see doctors' orders to not drive for six months.

• Dual Violation: HIPAA (Medical) records on phone data from vehicle (Example: Console to cellphone) Violation #1 – Pulled without “B” License Violation #2 – Records are HIPAA Protected

• I have several inspection in last year where attorneys are putting parameters on me for NO Paperwork besides registration papers.

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

842

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Issues you will face in 702 & Daubert Challenge/ Robinson (Texas) • 1. The Lawyers will be challenged at the scene/vehicle inspections • 2. Other Accident Reconstructionist If they are ahead of you in the law (Rules), they will have no problem using the new rules against you • 3. Police officers/DA Investigators – Usually if Criminal Cases

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

843

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Solutions

Look into PI License for your state Have a PI firm friend on Speed dial Start the conversation Now – Organizations Join together – “This is about us” March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

844

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

THERE IS GOOD NEWS! • 1. These Rules and legislation are new – Most of the new legislation being pushed has nothing to do with Accident Reconstruction despite the fact it’s harming us due to the technology overlap in vehicles.

• 2 You can get involved NOW and shape the direction of the legislation.

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

845

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Protect your reputation • Stay on top of the New Rules/Law Staying on top of these rules makes you the expert

Remember the bar is moving higher • Get necessary licensing to cover new Rules “PI License”?

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

846

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

SUMMARY – Lets Recap • Technology is here to stay – Attorneys are demanding more with the new DATA. • Privacy Law are changing and steer us into more education to cover the new rules • Adapt or die (Sink or swim)

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

847

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Summary – Bonus • Stay informed – Join a Local state Private investigation Org – My recommendation is TALI/FALI/CALI- National NCISS • $225 a year for all three – The list serves are worth the price. I will be In Washington DC talking to my law makers with a Representative from every state to let them know we are versed in the new bills that affect our careers.

• Peer communications through US • Conferences like this • Double check your Laws – Local/national

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

848

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Michael R. Depew TCS Consulting Michael.Depew@tcsmd.com 1-409-466-2439 cell www.TheCrashPro.com

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

849

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Hyundai – Kia Update Shawn Gyorke – Crash Data Services, LLC

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

850

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Shawn Gyorke • Owner Crash Data Services, LLC • Former law enforcement with Arlington Heights Police Department (IL) • info@crashdataservices.net • 847-217-6644

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

851

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Past Updates (2024 EDR Summit) 2024 EDR Summit - ADAS • Reviewed New Data Parameters • Smart Cruise Control Ex: Gear position, Mode Status • Forward Collision Avoidance Ex: Warning Levels

March 10-12, 2025

2024 EDR Summit – Testing • Introduced Zenith Z5 Scan Tool • Bar Pressure Ex: Average, Maximum • Regenerative Braking with Full EV • Rounding method for steering

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

852

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

March 10-12, 2025

Overview Updated Software and Reports

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

853

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

2025 Update: Software Version 2.0 • ADAS Data Logger (ADL) • Software Functionality • Future ADAS coverage?

• ADAS Driver 2 ECU

• VCIs vs ADLs

March 10-12, 2025

New Data Parameters • Vehicles with three (3) Events • 2025 Testing

• Pre-Crash Data Sections 4 & 5 • Pre-Crash Longitudinal and Lateral Accel • Pre-Crash Yaw Rate • Updated Longitudinal and Lateral Accel

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

854

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

New User’s Manual • New user manual covers ADL • Old user manual still covers VCI

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

855

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Automotive Data Logger (ADL)

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

856

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

ADL vs. Vehicle Communication Interface (VCI) • ADL replaces VCI • VCI no longer sold • VCIs continue to function with EDR2.0 software (for now) • Two (2) ADLs required (H/K) March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

857

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

ADL vs. Vehicle Communication Interface (VCI)

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

858

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Software – EDR2.0 (February 2025)

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

859

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

New Startup • After install of EDR2.0, only single (ADL) shortcut

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

860

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

New Startup • After Shortcut, user selects Hyundai or Kia

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

861

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Minor changes to the GUI to accommodate ADL

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

862

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Software splash screen adapts to VCI or ADL

* Hyundai VCI Example

March 10-12, 2025

* Hyundai ADL Example

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

863

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

ADL does not require CFCI adapter

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

864

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

ADL does not require CFCI adapter

2025 Hyundai Tucson

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

865

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

VCI or ADL: Determines CFCI/Adapter image

2025 Hyundai Tucson VCI Example

March 10-12, 2025

2025 Hyundai Tucson ADL Example

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

866

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

With ADL: CFCI never appears in Adapter selection

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

867

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Software functionality remains the same

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

868

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Note: Windows conflict

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

869

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Future coverage for ADAS Driver2 ECU? • New ADL coverage could be expanded to include ADAS Driver2 ECU

• No scheduled release. Unlikely legacy VCIs will have ADAS capability (CAN-FD)

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

870

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Future coverage for ADAS Driver2 ECU? • Direct to module (ADAS) cable (current GIT user manual)

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

871

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Just because it’s in the user manual…

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

872

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Just because it’s in the software…

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

873

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

ACM Location(s)

In large part, unchanged since 2013 2025 Hyundai Tucson

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

874

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

New Report Features

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

875

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

3 Events!

2025 Hyundai Santa Cruz

2025 Kia EV9

2025 Kia Carnival

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

876

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Vehicles with 3 Events • Kia

• Hyundai “New” models would likely have three (3) events Yellow = 2 Green = 3 Gray = not tested Blue = probable 3 No Genesis testing to date

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

877

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

DL3 vs. DL3A

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

878

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

DL3 vs. DL3A • The use of the incorrect ACU could result in incomplete data collection/translation

2025 Kia K5 March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

879 * Emphasis added

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Manual ECU selection

Users may be forced to select the ECU version (auto-vin does not select ECU automatically).

Does not appear to be fully resolved with recent EDR2.0 release

March 10-12, 2025

Special thanks to everyone at: Darren Wood Crash Analysis & Consulting, LLC

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

880

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Event Triggers • Explanation of Occupant Size Classification

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

881

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Event Triggers • Number of Event Trigger

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

882

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Event Triggers

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

883

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Pre-Crash Data Section 1* • Speed • Engine RPM • Engine Throttle • Acceleration • Master Cylinder • Service Brake • Anti-lock Braking • Stability Control • Steering March 10-12, 2025

*See 2024 EDR Summit materials for more details.

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

884

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Pre-Crash Data Section 2* • Gear Shift Display • Smart Cruise Control (on/off) • SCC (set speed) • SCC (units) • SCC (mode) • SCC (fail info)

*See 2024 EDR Summit materials for more details.

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

885

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Pre-Crash Data Section 3* • Forward Collision Avoidance • FCA Warning Level • Fail Info • 10 Hz

*See 2024 EDR Summit materials for more details.

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

886

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Forward Collision Avoidance “Cascade” Level 1: Audible Level: Haptic Level 3: Active Braking

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

887

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

FCA: Independent of driver application of brake switch

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

888

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Fail Info When the front windshield where the front view camera is located, front radar cover, bumper (if equipped) or sensor is covered with foreign material, such as snow or rain, it can reduce the detecting performance and temporarily limit or disable Forward Collision-Avoidance Assist.

2025 Hyundai Tucson owner’s manual March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

889

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Fail Info If this occurs the "Driver Assistance system limited. Camera obscured." or the "Driver Assistance system limited. Radar blocked." warning message, and the or warning lights will illuminate on the instrument cluster.

2025 Hyundai Tucson owner’s manual March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

890

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Pre-Crash Data Section 4

• Advanced Emergency Braking (on/engaged) • Cruise Control Status (on/off) • Adaptive Cruise (off/engaged) • Lane Departure Warning System (on/off) • Corrective Steering Function • Emergency Steering Function

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

891

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Pre-Crash Data Section 4

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

892

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Pre-Crash Data Section 5- Highway Driving Assist • Automatically Commanded Steering • Category A • Category B1 • Category C

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

893

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Highway Driving Assist Hyundai SmartSense | Safety & Convenience Tech | Hyundai USA

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

894

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Longitudinal and lateral acceleration (precrash) • 5 seconds • 2 Hz • 0.1 (g) increments

March 10-12, 2025

• Longitudinal Graph/Table • Lateral Graph/Table

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

895

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Longitudinal and lateral acceleration - Limits • Rounding (suspect anything less than 0.1 rounds down)

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

896

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Yaw rate (precrash) • 5 seconds • 2 Hz • 0.1 (g) increments • Positive or Negative

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

897

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Yaw rate (precrash) – Polarity

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

898

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Yaw rate (precrash) – Polarity

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

899

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

900

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Longitudinal and lateral acceleration • Updated resolution • 1ms vs. 10ms reporting

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

901

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Longitudinal and lateral acceleration • Implications

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

902

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Longitudinal and lateral acceleration • Implications

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

903

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Longitudinal and lateral acceleration • Also applies to impact sensors

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

904

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Longitudinal and lateral Delta-v • Updated resolution

March 10-12, 2025

• 1ms vs. 10ms reporting

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

905

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Easy Video and Image Analysis.

Interactively orthorectify and overlay your video on scene data for accurate vehicle speed or position measurements. Solve for camera positions. You can even project images and video back into your scene and do 3D object overlays for more complex analyses. The process is quick and easy!

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Tesla EDR Tool Kit

Crash Data Group is the North American distributor for the Tesla EDR Hardware Tool Kit. This EDR Tool kit contains all hardware required to download the Event Data Recorder (EDR) data for supported Tesla vehicles. www.crashdatagroup.com

March 10-12, 2025

This is the only kit contains genuine Tesla EDR cables

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Tesla Considerations Mike Merolli Aperture

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

906

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Mike Merolli Forensic Expert – Accident Reconstruction ACTAR #1518 30 Years of Experience Tesla MAPFRE Insurance CEMLEC (508) 498-7733 Mike.merolli@aperturellc.com

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

907

907

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

March 10-12, 2025

Tesla Full Self Driving (FSD) Tesla Considerations

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

908

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Levels of Automation

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

909

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Levels of Automation

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

910

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Five levels of Driving Automation • Level 0: No driving automation, the driver controls the vehicle at all times • Level 1: Driver assistance • Level 2: Partial driving automation, the vehicle controls some functions while the driver monitors (ADAS) • Level 3: Conditional driving automation, the vehicle uses AI to make decisions based on driving conditions • Level 4: High driving automation, the vehicle can operate autonomously in certain conditions • Level 5: Full driving automation, the vehicle can operate autonomously in all conditions without human intervention

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

911

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Autopilot - ADAS • Traffic Aware Cruise Control (TACC)

• Like traditional cruise control, TACC maintains a set driving speed. However, TACC also slows down or accelerates Model Y as needed to maintain the following distance from the vehicle in front of you.

March 10-12, 2025

• Autosteer

• Autosteer detects lane markings, road edges, and the presence of vehicles and objects to intelligently keep Model Y in its driving lane

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

912

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Navigate on Autopilot • Navigate on Autopilot builds on the features of Traffic-Aware Cruise Control and Autosteer.

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

913

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Navigate on Autopilot

Once enabled, the Navigate on Autopilot button appears on the map’s turn-byturn direction list whenever a navigation route is active and the route includes at least one controlled-access highway.

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

914

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Navigate on Autopilot

The Navigate on Autopilot icon shows in the turn-by-turn direction list when you are navigating to a destination and Navigate on Autopilot is available but not active.

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

915

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Operating Navigate on Autopilot

If Navigate on Autopilot is active, the icon is blue. If Enable at Start of Every Trip is turned on, the Navigate on Autopilot icon is selected whenever you start navigation.

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

916

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Navigate on Autopilot • The Navigate on Autopilot feature suite transitions based on the roadway class • Whenever Navigate on Autopilot is active, the instrument panel displays the driving lane as a single blue line in front of the Tesla icon.

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

917

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Cabin (Selfie) Camera The cabin (Selfie) camera can determine driver inattentiveness and provide you with audible alerts, to remind you to keep your eyes on the road when Autopilot is engaged.

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

918

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Full Self Driving Supervised

•Full Self-Driving (Supervised) is meant to work in a variety of driving scenarios.

You can use Full Self-Driving (Supervised) on any type of roadway, including residential and city streets.

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

919

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

March 10-12, 2025

Dashcam Tesla Considerations

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

920

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Dashcam

•Dashcam records video footage of your vehicle's surroundings while driving.

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

921

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Dashcam •The Dashcam icon is located in the app launcher. You can add the Dashcam app to the bottom bar for easy access (see Customizing My Apps). When Tesla is in Park, touching the Dashcam icon displays the Viewer (see Viewing Video Recordings).

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

922

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Dashcam • RECORDING: Dashcam is recording. To save video footage, touch the icon. To pause recording, press and hold the icon.

• AVAILABLE: Dashcam Is available but not actively recording. Touch the dashcam icon to start recording footage.

• PAUSED: Dashcam is paused. To resume recording, touch the icon. To avoid losing video footage, pause Dashcam before removing the flash drive.

• BUSY: Dashcam is in the process of loading, saving, or overwriting footage. While dashcam is busy, footage is not being captured and recorded.

• SAVED: Footage is saved. You can also save Dashcam clips by touching the Dashcam icon in the app launcher while Driving.

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

923

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Tesla Camera Views 1.When your desired footage is saved, view the clips on the touchscreen or a computer: 1. Touchscreen: Ensure Tesla is in Park and touch the Dashcam icon in the app launcher.

Videos are organized by timestamp.

See Viewing Video Recordings for more information.

2. Computer: Insert the USB flash drive into a computer and navigate to the TeslaCam folder. Videos are organized by timestamp.

See Viewing Video Recordings for more information.

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

924

Sentry Mode

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

When enabled, your vehicle's cameras and sensors (if equipped) remain powered on and ready to record suspicious activity around your vehicle when Tesla is locked and in Park.

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

925

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Sentry Mode If a threat is detected or the vehicle sensors determine there is a lot of jerky movement like when getting towed or shaken, Sentry Mode: • Pulses the headlights.

• Sounds the alarm.

• Displays a message on the touchscreen that indicates cameras may be recording to inform individuals outside of the vehicles.

• Alerts you of the alarm on the mobile app.

• Saves footage of the event to a USB drive (if installed).

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

926

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

March 10-12, 2025

Available Data Tesla Considerations

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

927

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

What is Tesla CAN Bus data?

What it isn’t • Not voice recording

What it is • Diagnostic and maintenance data • “Car logs” • “Diagnostic logs”

• Not photos and video

• A logging of signals and alerts coming across the in car communication bus

• Not time-series GPS location/position data

• i.e.: on the Model Y there can dozens of computers and modules reporting on the • Not always necessarily something either bus to the central computer called the IN the car or FROM Tesla Gateway • The Gateway records the signals and alerts March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

928

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

What is Tesla CAN Bus data?

• “Not always necessarily something either IN the car or FROM Tesla” • The data is collected in the car computer • It is originally stored to a fragile SD card • When triggered, CAN Log data is uploaded to tesla OTA

• Assume (1) power and (2) a wireless connection is available • Triggering can be done by an alert including Deployments, Non-Deployments or diagnostic events

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

929

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Where will I find the data?

• Data may be stored locally in the car at the main computer on an SD card • It should be the same data – assuming there was power to transmit that data OTA – as might be available from Tesla

• The card is fragile and accessing and retrieving that card improperly is likely to result in damage to the card March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

930

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

931

931

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

The Data Associated With Your Tesla Account You can request a copy of the data associated with your Tesla Account.

This information may include: •Order details •Account information •Customer support activity •Service history from your ownership period •Vehicle usage information •Safety event camera recordings (if applicable) •Infotainment system settings information •Mobile app usage information •Supercharging history March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

932

932

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

933

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

934

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

935

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

936

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

937

937

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

938

938

Request Your Data

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

939

Service Mode

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

940

Service Mode

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

941

Service Mode

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

942

Service Mode

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

943

Service Mode

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

944

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

945

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

SIGNAL STATES •SOME SIGNALS ARE REPORTED ON A REGULAR CADIENCE •SOME SIGNALS ARE REPORTED ONLY ON CHANGE

• WHEN THE EXCEL FORMAT IS FILTERED, SOME SIGNAL STATES AREN’T REPORTED OR PRESENT BECAUSE THOS STATES BENER OCCURRED DURING THE TIME PERIOD QUEIRIED March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

946

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Autosteer Signal States • Aborting • Aborted • Active_Nominal • Available • Disabled • Fault • Unavailable

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

947

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Cruise Control States • CRS_STATE_ENABLED • CRS_STATE_OVERRIDE • CRS_STATE_STANDBY • CRS_STATE_UNAVAILABLE

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

948

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Other Typical Signals • ABS BRAKE EVENT • ACCERATOR PEDAL POSITION • AUTO LANE CHANGE STATE • AUTOMATIC EMERGENCY BRAKING STATE • AUTOSTEER DRIVER HANDS ON DETECTION • BRAKE MASTER CYLINDER PRESSURE • BRAKE PEDAL MANUAL APPLICATION • CRASH ALGORITHM WAKE-UP • GEAR SELECTION:D, P, or R March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

949

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

March 10-12, 2025

FLASH DRIVES AND VIDEOS Tesla Considerations

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

950

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Flash drive videos • A portable media drive may contain a folder named TeslaCam • These are videos not EDR data and not CAN data

• Three subfolders: Recent Clips, Saved Clips, Sentry Clips • Recent Clips are recorded during regular drives • Saved Clips contain video recorded during a crash or horn activation • Sentry Clips are recorded while Tesla is parked • Assuming the system was enabled/activated

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

951

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Flash drive videos • Older vehicles may have the portable drive/USB port in the center console • Newer models have the port in the glove box and the car comes with a thumb drive

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

952

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Flash drive videos • Older vehicles may have the portable drive/USB port in the center console • Newer models have the port in the glove box and the car comes with a thumbdrive

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

953

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Flash drive videos • There is no conversion required

• The videos are recorded in *.mp4 format

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

954

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Dash Cam Clips

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

955

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Delete Clips

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

956

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Delete Clips

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

957

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

Title of the presentation Author name(s) and affiliation(s)

March 10-12, 2025

(c) 2025 Collision Publishing and identified author

March 10-12, 2025