a brief history in the uk v sub jud for uel.pdf · perspective preconception post incident...
Post on 11-Oct-2020
2 Views
Preview:
TRANSCRIPT
John Rusted LCGI MITAI AMSOE AMIRTE
Chairman of the Institute of Traffic Accident Investigators
Senior Collision Investigator, Humberside Police
Director of European Association for Accident Research &
Accident Analysis (EVU) Project Lead (UK) ‘CrashCube’ Crash Data Retrieval Project
A BRIEF INTRODUCTION TO THE WORK OF THE ‘CRASH’ INVESTIGATOR
Presented by
A BRIEF HISTORY
‘FOR OVER HALF A CENTURY,
THE AUTOMOBILE HAS
BROUGHT DEATH, INJURY
AND INESTIMABLE SORROW
AND DEPRIVATION TO
MILLIONS OF PEOPLE’ Ralph NADER 1967
UNSAFE AT ANY SPEED
In just over a century, 25 million people have lost their lives in road traffic incidents or crashes
EXPANDING UK CASUALTY RATE
ADDRESSING THE
SITUATION
ENTER THE COLLISION INVESTIGATOR
In the Second World War, it soon became apparent that alarming injuries were being suffered in what should have been survivable crashes. Crash Investigators worked with engineers to address the problem.
If air crashes could be made more survivable, why not the driver?
EMERGING FROM THE WAR YEARS
Whilst the pilot was better protected, the driver was less valuable
Safety features designed into aircraft were not immediately transferred to the motor car (seat belts and dashboard design)
The hunger for transport, particularly in the USA saw people killed at the rate of 45,000 a year, at speeds as low as 10 mph
1950’s and 1960’s – Manufacturers refused to accept any blame for increased road deaths. It was always, the ‘nut behind the wheel’
By the mid 60’s – 50,000 were killed every year on US roads, 3,000 as a result of striking dashboards or protrusions, many more as a
result of being ejected from the vehicle
In the UK at the same time, 1 person died every hour as a result of road traffic accidents
In the early 60’s it became apparent that road deaths needed to be reduced.
Standing in the way of the safety campaigner and engineer were the Manufacturers.
Laminated glass had been available since the 1930’s. Volvo produced the first three point seat belt in 1959.
Highly publicised examples such as the GM Chevrolet Corvair, drew attention to the need to change – readily overturned, even at low
speed. At a cost of $4 per unit, a stabiliser bar would have cured the Corvair.
The Mini was deemed too dangerous even for US roads – domestic
door locks, exposed fuel filler, poor crush worthiness.
Triumph Herald –drive shaft links loosened, poor frontal crush
stiffness.
SIMPLE ANSWER – MAKE EVERYTHING LOOK
BETTER OR MAKE IT SAFER ?
Cars generally became safer, but the motorist
still preferred style and horse power to
safety; Revised legislation was introduced –1967 saw
the 70mph speed limit, the MOT and breath tests
in the UK.
Seatbelts were fitted but not used. Compulsory in the UK in 1983 after
Government campaigns repeatedly failed to educate.
In the US, the air bag was developed as a direct result of motorists refusing to wear belts.
THE 60’s ONWARDS
THE CRUNCH – Grimshaw v Ford
The PINTO killed 180 and seriously injured 180 more, including Robert GRIMSHAW.
A secret Ford memo declared that those deaths and injuries cost the company £49.5 million. The cost of rectifying each vehicle was $11.
GRIMSHAW alone was awarded $125 million against Ford
The resistance from the motor industry effectively ended and safety became the name of the game
By 1986 Mercedes were fitting air bags as standard – still problems in USA with unrestrained occupants being killed by air bag deployment
NCAP testing – side impact testing introduced 31 years after frontal
Improved crashworthiness Biomechanically accurate
occupant modelling Better medical care and
improved survivability
In spite of the best of all efforts
We still see:
•1,850 people killed on UK roads (2010 statistics)
•22,000 seriously injured (2010 statistics)
•Maim and psychologically scar many thousands more
Cost per fatal estimated at £1.4 to 1.6 million
Picking up the pieces – the Police Collision Investigator
Identify the cause or causes of accidents
Identify the cause and mechanism of injury
Improve road and vehicle design Prosecution of offenders Prevent unwarranted prosecutions Provide the best service possible
under the Road Deaths Investigation Manual Model
Delivery of accurate expert witness report to Her Majesty’s Coroner and the Courts
Why Investigate and reconstruct accidents/collisions/crashes?
What are we dealing with and what are can we consider Basic principle
Behaviour of one or more vehicles (Mechanical failure/Vehicle dynamics)
Behaviour of one or more persons (Reactions of parties involved will vary with physical and mental condition, concentration, vehicle speed)
Variations in road surface condition and layout
Weather conditions
CONTRIBUTORY FACTORS
WHAT CAN BE USED TO RECONSTRUCT AN INCIDENT
Physical Evidence In gathering such evidence, it is of the utmost importance that first, the
‘scene’ is preserved
Witness Evidence
Can prove unreliable and may be dependant on;
Character and age Position Perspective Preconception Post incident influences (Trauma, peers etc)
Specialist Evidence
Forensic scientist/researcher Human factors expert Forensic meteorologist Metallurgist Tyre analyst Vehicle examiner Mathematician etc.
UNDERPINNING EVERYTHING (after proper scene preservation)
DETAILED AND EXHAUSTIVE SCENE EXAMINATION
COMPREHENSIVE AND ACCURATE RECORDING OF THE SCENE AND EVIDENCE
SCENE RECORDING AND SURVEYING METHODS
•Chain and tape
•Imagery/Photogrammetry/Aerial
•Total Station
•HDS 3D laser scanning
Primary methods
A NEW GOAL HOW TO SAVE TIME CONSUMED BY ROAD CLOSURES (AND STILL DO THE JOB)
‘Every scene is different’
‘Every collision investigator works at a different pace’
But the collision investigator just gets one chance to record everything that will be required
2008/2009 HIGHWAYS AGENCY STUDY AND INITIATIVE
FOR THE STRATEGIC ROAD NETWORK
Driven by the need to address the issue of delay
and inconvenience caused by the length of time
the Police consume in dealing with incidents where the right to pass and re-pass by the public
is prevented or interrupted
PROJECT AIMS AND OBJECTIVES
TO MINIMISE DURATION OF ANY ROAD CLOSURE AND THUS
DISRUPTION TO ROAD USER
ADDRESS THE NEED TO SECURE AND PRESERVE
EVIDENCE
but
EQUIPMENT
HDS 3D LASER SCANNERS
INITIAL TESTS AND FAMILIARISATION
SCANNING OF MILITARY AND OTHER ASSETS TO ASSESS RETURNS FROM COMPLEX
SHAPES/ANGLES, SURFACE TEXTURES AND MATERIALS
SCANNING DURING INCLEMENT WEATHER AND AT VARYING
RESOLUTIONS TO DETERMINE OPERATING LIMITS
Time surveying the target area scenes (high speed routes/complex) reduced More comprehensive data collection throughout the survey Accuracy maintained or improved upon Satisfactory output could be delivered in relatively short time frame Output could be kept simple or as complicated and detailed as required Traffic flow and pedestrian movement could be maintained where safe and appropriate although there was a post incident processing trade off
INITIAL FINDINGS
IF SAVING TIME WAS YOUR ONLY GOAL you may be missing a trick
Incident Junction 38, M62 – 2011
RTC c0400 hours Call to scene from home 0430 hours Arrival c05.45 hours 5 stations @ 10cm x 10cm at 100m (6m 49s) Scene examination Imagery Preliminary vehicle examination Recovery on scene 0730 hours CI Leaves scene 0745 hours Off-slip reopened c0800 hours
COMPLEX AND LABOUR INTENSIVE SCENES
10 SCANWORLDS – DATA COLLECTION OVER 3.5 HOURS (Estimated saving over GPS/TPS of c50% of traditional survey time)
IMAGE REMOVED COURT CASE PENDING
Following download and registration of scans, almost instant 3D perspectives of scene available to brief Senior Investigating Officers and Prosecutors
IMAGE REMOVED COURT CASE PENDING
Surface gouging, scratching, scuffing, marking
DEFAULT RESOLUTION PROVIDED A SUFFICIENTLY DENSE AND DETAILED SURVEY FROM WHICH FINE DETAIL AND DATA COULD BE EXTRACTED WITHOUT THE NEED TO FOCUS ON ANY PARTICULAR AREA
(Exceeds GPS/TPS capability/consistency)
DETAIL THAT CAN BE INTERROGATED
INCREASED CAPTURE HORIZON
Data captured from 7 stations on one road Resolution – 10cm x 10cm x 100m
IMAGE REMOVED COURT CASE PENDING
Device set up at 25 – 35m centres (Raining throughout survey)
IMAGE REMOVED COURT CASE PENDING
Views from specific positions, lines of sight, obscuration
Maintenance of traffic flow where safe
UNEXPECTED BUT USEFUL BENEFITS
Accurate representation of surface features, changes in material, worn features, fluids etc
Positions/dimensions (witnesses/debris/objects)
Recording of position/extent of fluids/tissue
‘Operating in a temperate, maritime climate’
OUTPUT METHODS
Simple for swift output - orthographic plan view in ‘greyscales’, cleaned, scaled and annotated
Orthographic plan view converted to line drawing (several software suites/programmes capable of use for converting from
orthographic plan view of point clouds)
3D HDS LASER SCANNED SCENE
TO 2D OUTPUT
3D MODELLING, RECONSTRUCTION OR SIMULATION
ANIMATED RECONSTRUCTIONS
SERVICE BUS v PEDESTRIAN
Thank you
top related