Volume 8, Issue 1 by Collision Publishing

2013 CDR SUMMIT DVD INCLUDED

2013 Vol.8 Iss.1

ollision C The International Compendium for Crash Research

Volume 8 Issue 1

Collision: The International Compendium for Crash Research Volume 8, Issue 1 - Spring 2013

Cover_Outside.indd 1

SPRING 2013

Hyundai & Kia EDR what is it... or not?

Validation & Use of EDR Data from a Non-CDR Supported Vehicle in a Criminal Prosecution Case Accuracy of GPS Speed & Location Data Measured in Emergency Vehicles collisionmagazine.com 5/3/2013 9:40:34 AM

A SOFTWARE SOLUTION FOR EVERY SITUATION:

Total station w/onboard data collection

Robotic total statio n w/Windows CE

Get EVR

□ Reliable □ Compatible See Exhibit A

Evidence Collection Forensic Mapping

Total station or GPS w/data collector

3D Laser Scanner

Evidence Collection Software?

tion Animacapabilities?

Do we

Yes

No Get Forensic CAD

MapScenes Evidence Recorder • Software for tablets and Windows CE devices • Connect with a total station or GNSS receiver to take measurements and collect evidence • Built for the professional reconstructionist

+ Animation Module

Cloud + Point Module

MapScenes Forensic CAD • A powerful and feature-rich program that provides law enforcement professionals and accident reconstruction specialists with confidence that the evidence they present is precise, compelling, and irrefutable • Produce scaled diagrams for use in cour t, creating a strong visual case for the prosecution or defense. Contains flexible options for point cloud/LiDAR data visualization and anim ation tools • Now with point cloud and animation addon modules • Built specifically for forensic www.MapScenes.com investigators and accident scene reconstructionists 1.800.668.3312

is registered in the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office. All other brand ® MapScenes names, product names or trademarks are property of their respective owners.

Exhibit A

want

Spring 2013 Volume 8 Issue 1 Cover photo courtesy of Shawn Gyorke

Contents

View the complete article index of all published issues of Collision Magazine at: collisionmagazine.com/articleindex.html

inside

Letter From the Editor

NAPARS: Letter From the President

Organization Partners Advertiser Index

features 10

Further Developments Regarding the Dynamic Modeling of Motor Vehicle Collision Response Using the SDOF Approach by Jai Singh

Hyundai and Kia Crash Data - A Preliminary Overview by: Rusty Haight, Shawn Gyorke, and Sean Haight

The Effect of Tinted Headlights. A Look Into the Level of Light Diminishment Headlights Experience When a Tint is Applied to the Headlight by Jeff Cardita

Laser Scanning for Crash Reconstruction by Joel Salinas

Validation and Use of EDR Data from a Non-CDR Supported Vehicle in a Criminal Prosecution Case by Wesley Vandiver, Isaac Ikram and Bryan Randles

Investigation of Traffic Crashes Involving the Inhalation of Difluoroethane by Adam M. Hyde and Roger W. Barrette

Accuracy of GPS Speed and Location Data Measured in Emergency Vehicles by David M. Little, Cst. Rob Joiner and Cpl. Stephen Hilliard

112

Reader Commentary on a Previously Published Article

www.collisionpublishing.com

Collision Magazine - Volume 8 Issue 1 3

FURTHER DEVELOPMENTS REGARDING THE DYNAMIC MODELING OF MOTOR VEHICLE COLLISION RESPONSE USING THE SDOF APPROACH Jai Singh, BS, MS, ACTAR Biomechanical Engineering Analysis & Research, Inc.

Collision Magazine - Volume 8 Issue 1

www.collisionpublishing.com

ntroduction: The utilization of the single degree of freedom approach to the simplified modeling of motor vehicles involved in collinear collisions and collisions that are effectively collinear (i.e. those with minimal rotational effects) has been ubiquitous in the accident reconstruction literature over the past five decades and represents a methodology that is generally well-accepted in the accident reconstruction community. The basic tenets of this modeling approach are bipartite. The first aspect consists of lumping the mass of each collision partner into a nodal mass located at the static center of mass of the collision partner. The second aspect consists of utilizing the appropriate simplified uniaxial structural model for relating the force applied in a collision and the corresponding structural deflection experienced by the impacted region of the collision partner, which can be directly related to the displacement experienced by the collision partner during the impact. We first consider the general case of the two body collinear collision as shown in Figure 1. www.collisionpublishing.com

Collision Magazine - Volume 8 Issue 1 11

Hyundai and Kia Crash Data A Preliminary Overview By: Rusty Haight, Shawn Gyorke, and Sean Haight

ackground The Bosch Crash Data Retrieval (CDR) Tool was first offered for sale, commercially, in 2000 largely as a function of a relationship between General Motors and, at the time, a scan tool company Vetronix. In the ensuing years, Ford (in 2003) then Chrysler (in 2008) and finally Toyota (in 2011) reached agreements to allow access to crash data from modules in their vehicles to be part of the CDR Tool functionality.

In 2012, the provisions of Title 49 of (US) Code of Federal Regulations, part 563 (49CFR563 or what has become known as “the rule” or “part 563”) took effect. “The rule” specifies that for “...vehicles manufactured on

Collision Magazine - Volume 8 Issue 1

or after September 1, 2012, if they are equipped with a ... device or function in a vehicle that records the vehicle's dynamic time-series data during the time period just prior to a crash event ... intended for retrieval after the crash event... (the) manufacturer ... 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...” 1 In the run-up to September 2012, the (US) National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) had published the provisions of “the rule” in the Federal Register and had responded to several petitions for reconsideration as well as comments published pursuant to notices of proposed rule making (NPRM). During

www.collisionpublishing.com

that process, some modifications and clarifications were ultimately made to provisions of “the rule;” however, one area in particular that was never really thoroughly addressed was the passage found in 563.12 specifying that manufacturers: “... 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 ...” When “the Final Rule” was published, the only commercially available tool designed to access recorded crash data was the Bosch CDR Tool. On the one hand, many anticipated then that, given the limited market for this type of tool/system and experience (which included at least one other potential tool supplier expressing interest in developing an alternative tool and then deciding against it as a function of the product development cost versus the market potential), the Bosch CDR Tool would become the tool widely adopted by other OEs who would be looking to be “563" complaint. On the other hand, “the rule” was written specifically to leave it to the OEs to find a way to “be compliant” inasmuch as NHTSA, a government agency, couldn’t specify a particular vendor/supplier for the tool which would enable OE compliance. At one point prior to the implementation of the “final rule,” Toyota had announced publicly (and even went so far as to post to their web site) that they were developing a tool for access to data recorded in their vehicles. In fact, Toyota was using what became known as their “Read Out Tool (ROT)” for some time. Ultimately, they worked with Bosch to include Toyota line vehicle access as part of the Bosch CDR Tool functionality. Similarly, other OEs who, at one time or another and in one way or another,

expressed objection to “the rule” or suggested the probability that they would develop separate or parallel tools have ended up working to make it such that data from their vehicles has become accessible using the Bosch CDR Tool. Notable exceptions; however, have emerged. As of this writing, Land Rover and Jaguar (which were purchased from Ford by Tata Motors around the time of the 2009 auto industry “troubles”) have a process in place which requires someone looking to get data from their relevant system(s) to arrange the retrieval with them (the OE). In a rather unique interpretation of “the rule,” Rover and Jag then required that the retrieved “data” be sent to (at last report) the UK for translation to what one might hope to anticipate is a “compliant” report form/format. In “563,” we find a passage (at 563.12) specifying that manufacturers: “... 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...(emphasis, authors).” Notably, in the strictest reading of this part of “563,” the commercial availability of access to a tool that “accesses” and “retrieves” data but does not generate a report would satisfy this requirement. By extension, or perhaps in application, one might point to the remainder of “the rule” which addresses (for example, at 563.8(a) Table III) that the “... data elements ... must be reported in accordance with the range, accuracy and resolution specified in Table III ... (emphasis, authors).” While there is, admittedly, still no requirement in “the rule” specifically calling for the retrieval tool to generate a report, or “when” a report might be generated relative to the access and retrieval, clearly that was anticipated by NHTSA as “the rule” was drafted although it wasn’t actually laid out in “the rule’s” final format.

Editor’s note: While the Bosch Crash Data Retrieval Tool remains the primary commercially available system used by collision reconstructionists to access and retrieve crash data stored in passenger cars, light trucks and SUVs, other options have emerged which allow access to crash data recorded in modules in those few vehicles not currently covered by the Bosch CDR Tool. This first-of-its-kind review is a brief comparison of what those other systems offer - and don’t offer - compared to that afforded by the Bosch CDR Tool. In addition to this article, some limited information about these systems has already been incorporated into the Collision Safety Institute’s CDR Data Analyst course curriculum including a comparison of the data which may be retrieved by way of the other options to data from instru-

mented crash tests. However, since that course is designed to train and support users of the Bosch CDR Tool, not these other tools, the information there is, of course, relatively limited. For a detailed and comprehensive look at data from tools such as those offered for non-Bosch CDR Tool supported vehicles - including comparisons to a wider range of fully instrumented crash tests - those interested in these systems should consider attending the CDR User’s Summit in Houston, TX in January, 2014 where the use of these tools and detailed reliability comparisons from crash tests such as those mentioned herein as well as other related issues will be more fully presented.

www.collisionpublishing.com

Collision Magazine - Volume 8 Issue 1 35

Laser Scanning for Crash Reconstruction Joel Salinas, ACTAR

Collision Magazine - Volume 8 Issue 1

www.collisionpublishing.com

ne of the tools receiving quite a bit of attention these days in the crash reconstruction arena is the 3D laser scanner. The use of laser scanners is not new to this field of forensic work but it is one of the most rapidly growing markets. Although originally developed for survey use, much like the total station, it did not take long for those in the forensic field to recognize the advantages of this technology. Laser scanning lends itself well to documenting crash scenes and the environment, as well as both damaged and exemplar vehicles. The fact that the technology has been readily accepted by the courts makes it more appealing as a tool. You have probably seen scanners in use at the crash testing sites at the ARC-CSI conference over the past couple of years. Articles on the use of this technology are also readily available in various publications. For those unfamiliar with the technology a brief description of laser scanning follows. A more detailed description can be found by researching the manufacturer’s websites. A 3D laser scanner is a tool for capturing the 3D measurement of data points. The scan data produces a point cloud where each point measured has an X,Y,Z coordinate. Depending on the scene or object being scanned, these point clouds consist of several million data points. Currently there are two types of laser scanners being used for forensic applications. The time-of-flight scanner emits a pulse of laser light that bounces off of the target and is reflected back to the scanner. Measurements are based on the time it takes for the pulse to travel to and from the target. The phase-based scanner emits a continuous wave that is reflected off of the target and returns to the scanner. Measurements are based on the changing phases of the laser light. Time-of-flight scanners have a longer range, up to 300 meters (~1000 feet), and can gather up to 50,000 points per second. Phase-based scanners have a shorter range, up to 187 meters (~600 feet), and can gather up to 1 million points per second. Typically, time-of-flight scanners with their longer range are used for larger outdoor scenes. The scanner will measure 360° horizontally and approximately 270° vertically, producing a near full-dome scan. The scanner cannot measure the area directly below its position due to the base of the instrument blocking the laser’s path.

The first step in the typical scanning workflow is to allow the instrument to measure the scene. The next step involves the scanner making an additional pass to take a panoramic image using an internal camera. This image is then used to apply color to each point captured. The scan data can then be viewed with color applied from the camera image, in grey scale, or in a rainbow true color mode. The panoramic image can be viewed separately from the scan. Measurements can be made within the point cloud or from the image itself. It is rare that a single scan will capture all the data needed. The scanner, like a camera, is a line-of-sight tool. In order to capture the scan data, the scanner needs to “see” the object. Normally, multiple scans from various positions are required to capture the entire scene. The scan data is processed and registered together using the scanner’s proprietary software. The reconstructed scan data is then cropped and cleaned before it is exported for use in a CAD or modeling program. Figure 3 shows a scan of the interior of the bus. Using the MapScenes software tools, the roof of the bus is removed to view the inside passenger compartment. For most major scenes, laser scanning is considered to be the quickest as well as the most accurate and reliable way to document both the roadway and the surrounding environment. Laser scanning is also efficient in that a typical scan takes 6-7 minutes followed by the time to capture the image. When considering the hazards faced while mapping a scene using traditional methods, laser scanning reduces one’s exposure to traffic by reducing the necessity of standing in the roadway. Hence the reasons that highway departments are adopting this technology for survey work. Figure 4 shows the reconstructed scan of a four-way intersection. The level of detail captured in this scan allows a view from each side of the intersection as well as the position of all the traffic signals. The scene was scanned during normal traffic flow. Traffic noise was removed from the scan. All scans were taken from the sidewalks. Don’t throw out the total station yet. The scanner cannot wholly replace the total station. There are instances where you will need both tools to do a complete documentation of the scene. For example, the scanner may not pick up faint tire marks on the roadway surface if there is not enough contrast between the two. The tire marks will show up in the image captured by the scanner but not necessarily in the scan. In these instances use the scanner in conjunction with the total station and shoot some control points that are easily identified within the scan. When you need to combine the scan data with the total station data, the two sets can be aligned using the control points.

www.collisionpublishing.com

Collision Magazine - Volume 8 Issue 1 49

Validation and Use of EDR Data from a

Non-CDR Supported Vehicle in a Criminal Prosecution Case Wesley Vandiver Orange County District Attorney’s Office

Isaac Ikram and Bryan Randles Biomechanical Research and Testing, LLC

ase Summary In the early morning hours of December 18, 2010, a father was driving his teenaged son to a high school debate competition in the family’s green 2000 Buick Le Sabre. They were traveling northbound on Knott Avenue in the City of Buena Park, California. Driving conditions were less than optimal due to darkness and falling rain. At approximately 5:34 AM, they entered the intersection of Knott Avenue and Crescent Avenue. As they reached the center of the intersection, their Buick was struck on the passenger side in a violent collision that resulted in their deaths. The 18-year-old driver of a blue 2009 Mitsubishi Lancer GTS had been warned about the dangers of driving while intoxicated. As he was driving westbound on Crescent Avenue approaching an eventual collision with the Buick, his blood alcohol concentration was 0.13% and he had been smoking marijuana. He had recently purchased the 2009 Mitsubishi Lancer, and later admitted to investigators that he verified the governed speed of the vehicle by reaching 120 miles per hour on the freeway several days prior to this incident.

and door. Following the near perfectly-perpendicular collision, the left side of the Mitsubishi and the right side of the Buick slammed together before both vehicles traveled in a West-northwest direction toward their eventual points of rest. The Buick, missing its right-front wheel and hub, left a trail of scrapes as it traveled over a curb and sidewalk, knocked down a metal sign post, crossed an adjacent cul-de-sac and penetrated a cinderblock wall before coming to rest in the front yard of a residence. The Mitsubishi left no post-collision evidence that could be seen by the on-scene investigators. Through later analysis of photographs and video evidence, its post-impact motion was determined. The surviving driver of the Mitsubishi was the only known living eyewitness to the collision. Despite significant investigative effort, no other eyewitnesses were located who could verify the phasing of the traffic signals at this intersection or the pre-collision speeds of the involved vehicles.

A security camera at an adjacent gas station captured the collision. The frame rate and lack of clarity in the video prevented any meaningful analysis regarding pre-collision speeds. HowThere was no evidence of pre-collision braking by ever, the video did capture the impact between either driver. The front of the Mitsubishi crashed the vehicles and provided important information into the Buick in the area of its right-front fender regarding the post-impact motion and trajectory 60

Collision Magazine - Volume 8 Issue 1

www.collisionpublishing.com

of the Mitsubishi. It also showed that the northbound traffic signal for the Buick had been green for over one minute when the Buick entered the intersection and that the westbound signal for the Mitsubishi had been red for that same period of time. The minimal amount of physical evidence that could be identified and documented by on-scene investigators was later overlaid onto a collision site survey. The additional evidence available in scene photos and still captures from the security video were used to determine and verify the post-collision motion for the vehicles. Without any further analysis, one thing was plainly obvious - the Mitsubishi had been traveling at an extremely high rate of speed when it impacted the Buick. The extent of the vehicle deformation was a significant clue. However, most telling was the degree to which the Mitsubishi deviated the trajectory of the Buick despite the Buick’s nearly 800-pound weight advantage.

www.collisionpublishing.com

Collision Magazine - Volume 8 Issue 1 61

Investigation of Traffic Crashes Involving the Inhalation of Difluoroethane Adam M. Hyde and Roger W. Barrette, MSE Major Crash Assistance Team of Lake County, Illinois

C2H4F2 78

Collision Magazine - Volume 8 Issue 1

www.collisionpublishing.com

For decades people have been inhaling household products to get their next “high.” Some of the most common are spray paint, super glue, gasoline and common household solvents. The practice is commonly referred to as “huffing,” which is a slang term defined as inhaling a substance to become intoxicated, or volatile substance abuse (VSA). It can easily be done by inhaling fumes off a rag covered in solvent or by inhaling fumes from spray paint contained in a paper bag, as shown in Figure 11. Many states have a law to address those driving under the influence of these intoxicating compounds (DUI) or other non-traditional DUI cases. When there is a death or great bodily injury, the charges are enhanced to felonies such as Aggravated DUI or Reckless Homicide. The “intoxicating compound” then becomes an element of the offense for which a prosecutor has to prove. This is most easily done by toxicological testing of the person’s blood, urine, or other bodily fluids or tissue. However, with the intoxicating compound, the toxicologist performing the test must know or have a good idea of what volatile substance they are looking for.

nhalation Abuse Inhalants are volatile substances that produce chemical vapors that can be inhaled to induce a psychoactive, or mind altering effect2. The term “inhalants” is used to describe a variety of substances whose main common characteristic is that they are rarely, if ever, taken by any route other than inhalation. This definition encompasses a broad range of chemicals that have different pharmacological effects. Precise categorization of inhalants is difficult. One classification system lists four general categories of inhalants; volatile solvents, aerosols, gases, and nitrites, which are based upon the forms in which they are often found. Substances commonly used by inhalant abusers fall into these categories:

•

Volatile solvents are liquids that vaporize at room temperature. They are found in a number of products used for common household and industrial purposes. These include paint thinners and removers, correction fluid, glues, and felt-tip markers.

•

Aerosols are sprays that contain propellants and solvents. They include spray paints, hair sprays, deodorant sprays, and fabric protector sprays.

•

Gases include medical anesthetics as well as gases used in household or commercial products including ether, chloroform, and halothane. The most common abused gas is nitrous oxide, or “laughing gas.” This gas can be found in whipped cream dispensers.

•

Nitrites often are considered a special class of inhalants. Unlike most other inhalants, which act directly

on the central nervous system (CNS), nitrites act primarily to dilate blood vessels and relax the muscles. These are primarily sexual enhancers and are commonly known as “poppers” or “snappers.” Amyl nitrite is used in certain diagnostic procedures and has been prescribed in the past to treat patients with heart pain. Nitrites are now prohibited by the Consumer Safety Commission but can still be found today, sold in small bottles. Inhalants can be breathed in through the nose or the mouth in a variety of ways including sniffing, spaying aerosols directly into the mouth or nose, bagging, huffing, or inhaling from balloons. Inhaled chemicals are absorbed rapidly into the bloodstream through the lungs and are quickly distributed to the brain and other organs. Within seconds of inhalation, the user experiences intoxication along with other effects similar to those produced by alcohol. Alcohol-like effects may include slurred speech, the inability to coordinate movement, euphoria, and dizziness. Because the intoxication lasts only a few minutes, abusers frequently seek to prolong the high by inhaling repeatedly over the course of several hours. With successive inhalations, abusers can suffer loss of consciousness and possibly death. At the least, they will feel less inhibited and less in control. Although the chemical substances found in inhalants may produce various pharmacological effects, most inhalants produce a rapid high that resembles alcohol intoxication, with initial excitation followed by drowsiness, disinhibition, lightheadedness, and agitation. If sufficient amounts are inhaled, it may produce anesthesia and lead to unconsciousness or death from asphyxiation (high concentrations of the fumes which displace available oxygen in the blood).

Figure 1: Example of inhaling fumes off a rag covered in solvent or by inhaling fumes from spray paint contained in a paper bag

www.collisionpublishing.com

Collision Magazine - Volume 8 Issue 1 79

Accuracy of GPS Speed and Location Data Measured in Emergency Vehicles David M. Little, P.Eng. Baker Materials Engineering Ltd.

Cst. Rob Joiner Abbotsford Police Department

Cpl. Stephen Hilliard RCMP ICARS

Collision Magazine - Volume 8 Issue 1

www.collisionpublishing.com

GPS

bstract Modern emergency vehicles, such as police vehicles and fire trucks, are often equipped with a Global Positioning System (GPS) receiver that can determine the vehicle’s speed and location based on data the unit receives from satellites. This information is typically converted to one or more National Marine Electronics Association (NMEA 0183) format sentences or a proprietary Trimble (TAIP) sentence and then stored in a user-specified format in a laptop within the vehicle. This laptop - often referred to as a docking station or a mobile work station (MWS) - then forwards this data to a central dispatch by way of an on-board modem. In the event that one of these vehicles is involved in a collision, the GPS data can be retrieved either from the onboard computer or from the central server to assist with a collision reconstruction. Typically, the speed of the vehicle just prior to impact is of particular importance. The GPS data may also be relied upon to determine the path travelled by the vehicle and its direction prior to impact. In order to properly apply the GPS data to an investigation, the reconstructionist must know the limitations of the information. In particular, one needs to know the magnitude of the potential error in the speed and location values. The subject

testing set out to quantify these potential errors for some GPS receivers commonly used in emergency vehicles. The testing also aimed to establish if there was any data in the NMEA sentences captured by the GPS receivers, but not always available in the on-board laptop, that would allow for a more precise determination of speed. Two GPS receivers that are not used on emergency vehicles but that can be found during collision investigations (an after market vehicle navigation system and a personal heart rate monitor for jogging or cycling) were also included in this study.

ntroduction GPS technology allows a receiver (such as a handheld GPS unit or a laptop in an emergency vehicle) to receive data from a network of satellites in orbit around earth. This data can be interpreted by the receiver to establish its location (latitude, longitude and elevation) and speed (horizontal and sometimes vertical) relative to earth. This information is typically provided by the GPS receiver at 1 Hz and includes a date and time stamp in Coordinated Universal Time (UTC). The GPS receiver provides this data in a standard NMEA or TAIP sentence - string of numbers and letters that have a specific order and meaning. Two standard GPS NMEA sentences that provide information valuable to a reconstruction and a TAIP sentence are shown below:

www.collisionpublishing.com

Collision Magazine - Volume 8 Issue 1 89