Counsel, and insurance claim managers and adjusters benefit when they have knowledge of the forensic investigation that is carried out by a professional engineer.\u00a0 The investigation determines why – the cause – a structure failed<\/strong> or did not perform properly,<\/b>\u00a0or why <\/b>an accident happened.\u00a0 <\/strong>This includes environmental accidents and fuel oil spills, and slips, trips and falls.<\/p>\n The process followed by experienced engineers results in a thorough investigation that leads to an objective opinion on cause.\u00a0 The results can be given in a well written, jargon-free report if required, to the standards of ??? (Nova Scotia).<\/p>\n This blog identifies and describes the typical steps in a forensic engineering investigation.\u00a0 <\/b><\/p>\n Investigations can be complex and time consuming involving all the steps in the process.\u00a0 Or simple and quick, particularly when some steps are not needed because of the nature of the failure or accident, or there’s interest in focusing on one key element in the problem.\u00a0 <\/b><\/p>\n The engineer’s experience can also simplify an investigation sometimes.\u00a0 For example, I saw the reason ice was falling from a roof from across the street with binoculars.\u00a0 And another time, the reason for a trip and fall accident in a couple of photographs sent me.\u00a0<\/b><\/p>\n The process is followed regardless of whether the professional engineer is retained by the plaintiff or the defendant, a claims manager or the property owner.\u00a0 and whether retained <\/b>as a consulting expert\u00a0or a\u00a0testifying expert.<\/p>\n The process is also followed in spite of the fact that the great majority of disputes that arise from an engineering failure or an accident are settled out of court.<\/p>\n The word \u201cforensic\u201d from the Latin forum<\/em> indicates that the investigative findings assist the justice system resolve a dispute \u2013 that\u2019s certainly\u00a0the case\u00a0if the thoroughness of a forensic investigation keeps a dispute out of court.<\/p>\n A structure is anything in the built environment, including alterations of the natural environment like highway embankments and earth and rock slopes.\u00a0 A failure can involve total collapse of a structure or its inadequate performance.<\/p>\n There are three fundamental components to the forensic engineering investigative process:<\/p>\n At some point we are interested in establishing a before\/after scenario:<\/p>\n Rigid formulae for investigating failures and accidents do not exist.\u00a0 But all forensic engineering investigations contain the following steps to a greater or lesser degree.<\/p>\n Visual assessment can be broken down further:<\/p>\n Field investigations can also be broken down further:<\/p>\n Research can be broken down too:<\/p>\n Most of the investigation involves gathering data and most of the report – more than 3\/4 – involves analysing and presenting the data.\u00a0\u00a0This points to the importance of the data gathering.\u00a0 The degree of certainty in the final opinion of the cause of the failure or accident is often a function of the amount of data gathered.<\/p>\n In fact, guidelines on failure investigation and forensic engineering issued by national engineering associations encourage professional engineers to take only those cases where they can carry out a thorough investigation and gather enough data to be able to give a reliable opinion. <\/b><\/p>\n Following is a brief description of each step in the investigative process:<\/p>\n Review documents<\/i><\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n Reviewing documents provided by counsel during the initial briefing is an important first step in a forensic\u00a0engineering investigation.\u00a0 These documents sometimes provide the only data available to an engineer investigating a failure or accident.\u00a0 <\/i>Documents include material like the following:<\/p>\n Additional published documents almost always\u00a0researched by a professional engineer include:<\/p>\n Documents like these are often studied a number of times during the different stages of an investigation.<\/p>\n Form hypothesis and plan investigation<\/i><\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n Information from the documents along with an initial site visit and visual assessment enables the professional engineer to plan the investigation based on what he thinks caused the failure or accident \u2013 his initial hypothesis.\u00a0 Investigations are designed to confirm, revise, or refute the initial hypothesis.<\/p>\n The assumptions made, and their validity, underlying the professional engineer\u2019s initial thoughts on the incident are identified and documented.\u00a0 <\/b><\/p>\n Implicit in the most thorough investigations is an effort to also prove something did not occur in some other manner.<\/p>\n Well planned investigations are sometimes set out as follows:<\/p>\n This simple format enables the investigation to be described in detail later.\u00a0 It also facilitates development of a timeline of the forensic investigation.<\/p>\n The format is much the same as a \u201cwork breakdown structure\u201d in the field of project management.\u00a0 The \u201cwork\u201d in this case is the forensic engineering investigation that has been \u201cbroken down\u201d into different tasks.<\/p>\n Determine before\/after scenario<\/i><\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n In checking the hypothesis, engineering investigations determine the before\/after scenario (see Introduction):<\/p>\n Visit and visually assess site<\/i><\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n This step involves visiting the site as soon as possible after the failure or accident.\u00a0 The professional engineer walks and pokes around the site\u00a0\u2013 kicks the tires in a sense, to get\u00a0a feel\u00a0for where things are and the nature and extent of the damage, and\u00a0examines exposed surfaces.\u00a0 It’s a very simple task – not very technical at all, but invaluable in getting a feel for the scene and bringing the documents to life.<\/p>\n It helps to dictate to a smartphone or Dictaphone what is being seen and done during the visual assessment.<\/p>\n Sketching and measuring what seems to be relevant is started at this early stage.\u00a0 Measuring, testing, and quantifying in a number of different ways often characterizes an investigation carried out by a professional engineer.<\/p>\n Photograph and videotape site<\/i><\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n Photographing and videotaping the failure\/accident site and the failed structure is an important initial step, and the sooner the better before remedial work alters conditions.<\/p>\n Equally important is a caption or descriptive note for each photograph stating:<\/p>\n Interview witnesses<\/i><\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n Interviewing witnesses to the failure or accident or the conditions existing beforehand is also an important initial step.\u00a0 It should be done as soon as possible after the incident while memories are fresh and site conditions unchanged.\u00a0 Record names and addresses in the event the witness must be called to testify at a hearing later. <\/b><\/p>\n Describe the failure or accident <\/i><\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n This step records a description of what happened during the failure or accident based on the comments of the witnesses interviewed and information from the documents.\u00a0 Talking with people who were there and\u00a0saw or experienced the failure if it\u00a0was a sudden collapse of a structure, or an accident, is\u00a0particularly valuable to the description.<\/p>\n Survey and document the damage to the structure<\/i><\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n This step involves recording the damaged condition of the structure that has collapsed or\u00a0does not\u00a0perform properly.\u00a0 The condition is recorded\u00a0by means of tasks such as the following:<\/p>\n This should be done as soon as possible after the\u00a0failure before data and evidence are altered or lost.\u00a0 The information enables a before\/after comparison to be made after the next step is completed.\u00a0 This type of comparison is\u00a0often\u00a0quite helpful as noted.<\/p>\n Determine how the structure was built<\/i><\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n How the structure was built, whether or not it conformed to the design, and the adequacy of\u00a0the design,<\/b> is determined\u00a0at this stage.\u00a0 Also, whether\u00a0or not\u00a0the design\u00a0and construction\u00a0conformed to\u00a0the standards of the day.\u00a0 This information is\u00a0obtained from\u00a0the design and construction\u00a0plans.\u00a0 Also from\u00a0research of\u00a0building codes and\u00a0industry\u00a0guidelines existing at the time\u00a0and checking these against the structure on site.\u00a0 Tasks involved in this step include the following:<\/p>\n How many of these tasks are carried\u00a0out and in what detail depends on the situation, the structure,\u00a0and the failure.\u00a0 Sometimes very little of the above is done.\u00a0 Sometimes it’s enough just to measure and prepare sketches of\u00a0the damage and view and study the structure with these sketches in hand.<\/p>\n Determine the site conditions<\/i><\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n The site is the area the structure is in\u00a0and the terrain beyond the site including other structures.<\/p>\n The site conditions of interest\u00a0at this stage of the forensic engineering investigative process include:<\/p>\n Investigating and determining site conditions includes:<\/p>\n Detailed topographic and elevation\u00a0surveys are usually made when the failure of a building or a civil engineering structure, or the cause of an accident, is thought to involve the terrain in which the site is located.<\/p>\n Drainage studies (hydrology, hydrogeology) are made when surface or groundwater may have been a factor in a failure or an accident.<\/p>\n Geotechnical and foundation investigations may be necessary if the cause of the failure of a structure appears to be in the foundations or the subsurface soils.<\/p>\n Full scale field tests and accident reconstruction may be carried out.\u00a0 This is done when these methods are assessed as the most reliable means of gathering data on the effects of the terrain, and features in it, on the failure or the accident.<\/p>\n At this stage in the investigative process, it is often necessary to carry out laboratory tests.\u00a0 These would determine the chemical, physical, mechanical, strength, and\/or drainage properties of materials used in construction at the site of a failure or an accident.\u00a0 It might be necessary to analyse the toxic fumes emitted by a compound or product used in construction.<\/p>\n Typical materials used in construction are soil, rock, steel, concrete, wood, plastic, adhesives, asphalt, and masonry products.<\/p>\n Composite materials like asphalt or reinforced concrete can be taken apart in a laboratory to determine how the material was formed.\u00a0 For example, the location, type, and size of reinforcing steel in a reinforced concrete slab that failed.<\/p>\n Desk studies and leg work<\/i><\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n To some extent, research studies during a forensic\u00a0engineering investigation \u2013 desk studies in some engineering disciplines, are on-going like document review.<\/p>\n The work often involves literature searches, telephone and internet work, and leg work to sources outside the office like libraries and the offices of persons to interview and consult with.<\/p>\n It also involves research and study of aspects of the engineering investigation that have assumed some relevance.\u00a0 For example, past mining activity in an area, the standard of care at the time the structure was designed and constructed, the shrinkage properties of a fill material, and the different modes of failure of a soil-steel bridge.<\/p>\n Research\u00a0also identifies and gathers together all information in appropriate categories relevant to the investigation of the failure (see Document Review above).\u00a0 This would be information usually not contained in the documents provided by counsel during the initial briefing.\u00a0 Information like original construction and as-built drawings, geotechnical and environmental reports, and published mapping of the area.\u00a0 Availability of the material would be determined and copies obtained if possible.<\/p>\n Also during this step in the forensic engineering investigative process the need would be identified for additional engineering and scientific specialists to investigate some aspect of the failure, and study relevant findings.\u00a0 Specialists would be identified,\u00a0contacted, and conferred with about their possible contribution, and retained if necessary.<\/p>\n ***<\/p>\n Of particular importance during the research stage would be the identification of building\u00a0codes and industry guidelines.\u00a0 Also the standard of care followed at some period relevant to the design and construction of the failed structure, or the structure(s) involved in the accident.<\/p>\n Identify building codes and industry guidelines<\/i><\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n Identify applicable government and industry codes, standards, regulations, and guidelines.\u00a0 Include national and international codes, etc, that are relevant to the failure or accident and relied on locally.\u00a0 Search and identify technical papers and state-of-the-art reports that are relevant to the problem.\u00a0 Obtain copies and review this material.<\/p>\n Identify standard of care<\/i><\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n This could be an important task during a forensic engineering investigation if the findings might be presented during a more formal dispute resolution process or at trial.<\/p>\n The standard of care is the standard commonly applied by professionals or other workers practicing the same discipline or trade in the same area at the time the structure(s) was designed and constructed that was involved in the failure or accident.<\/p>\n Identifying the standard can be quite simple or very involved and time consuming.\u00a0 It involves interviewing other professional engineers and\/or workers practicing in the area at the time the structure was designed and constructed to determine the procedures they followed and the standards they employed.\u00a0 If there is wide variance you would speak with more people until you feel satisfied you know what the average is.<\/p>\n If there were\u00a0two small firms practicing in the area at the time, as was the case for a soil-steel bridge failure that I investigated, then it\u2019s easy.<\/p>\n On the other hand, as in another case, if there are 11 different types of firms and associations playing a part in the design and construction process associated with an accident \u2013 providing different products and services to the construction process, then it\u2019s difficult and time consuming.\u00a0 You would need to identify and speak with a number of representatives of each type of firm and association \u2013 potentially dozens of people, to be satisfied you\u00a0understand the process as followed at the time and the\u00a0average standard of care with which this was done.<\/p>\n This task of carrying out one or more follow-up investigations results from the need to “follow the evidence”.\u00a0 This concept hardly needs explaining to counsel.\u00a0 It is equally important in a forensic investigation.\u00a0 Data will be gathered and evidence uncovered during\u00a0a previous investigation that suggests another\u00a0line of enquiry should be followed up or another area\u00a0investigated.\u00a0 I think this\u00a0would be\u00a0like cross-examination during discovery uncovering evidence that suggests a new line of questioning.<\/p>\n Implicit in\u00a0the fact that there\u00a0might be\u00a0evidence that should be followed\u00a0up is\u00a0the possibility that the initial hypothesis on the cause of the failure or accident might need to be revised or rejected completely.<\/p>\n The possibility of the need for follow-up investigations is a fact of life during forensic engineering investigations.<\/p>\n This is one of two or three final, important steps in the forensic engineering investigative process.\u00a0 Lots of data is good but you\u2019ve got to do something with the data – draw meaning from it, to serve the justice system.<\/p>\n Data from one stage looked at critically<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n In analysing and reasoning to a conclusion, the data from any one stage of the investigation is looked at critically – taken apart, in a sense, and each part looked at carefully, and how they are related and their interaction examined.<\/p>\n Identify typical modes of failure?<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n The data is also looked at closely to see if it is characteristic of or associated with a mode of failure or a cause based on past experience and\/or mathematical calculation.\u00a0 Professional engineers\u00a0have identified and published typical modes of failure\u00a0for the various structures in the built environment.\u00a0 These are available for review and guidance to the forensic engineer during a forensic investigation.<\/p>\n Data from other stages looked at critically and for corroboration<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n The data from other stages of the\u00a0forensic investigation\u00a0are similarly looked at, and also studied to see if there is corroboration of conclusions between stages.\u00a0 Pattern is looked for within individual data and amongst different sets of data.\u00a0 And\u00a0if there is a pattern, considering if it is typical of a known cause\/mode of failure.<\/p>\n Draw conclusions and confirm, revise, or refute hypothesis<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n At some point, conclusions are drawn from the analysis and the hypothesis confirmed, revised, or refuted.\u00a0 If revised or refuted then a new hypothesis is formed and this investigated with follow-up forensic investigations.<\/p>\n If the initial hypothesis is confirmed then\u00a0the cause of a failure or accident has been identified and an opinion can be stated.<\/p>\n Document reasoning<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n At all points in the analysis the reasoning followed is documented and the basis of the conclusions is recorded.<\/p>\n Easy analysis<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n Sometimes the data analysis and development of an opinion is quite easy.\u00a0 For example, when field work uncovers a concrete floor slab that is supported by irregularly spaced columns, and the particular type of slab that\u2019s in place\u00a0beneath the structure is actually required to be uniformly supported.\u00a0 Then it\u2019s easy to hold the opinion that the floor slab is inadequately supported.<\/p>\n Complex analysis<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n At other times it\u2019s complex. \u00a0For example, when there are more than 20 possible modes of failure for the collapse of a soil-steel bridge.\u00a0 When\u00a0the collapsed bridge is not available to examine, then the available data must be analysed for each mode and the cause identified by a process of elimination.<\/p>\n Mysterious analysis<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n Sometimes it\u2019s mysterious.\u00a0 Why is there a toxic odour in the concrete enclosed lower level of a structure and the lighter-than-air fumes are not detected in the timber framed upper levels?\u00a0 A chance remark about timber structures “breathing” \u2013 are more pervious, in a sense, in engineering terms, solves the mystery as to cause.\u00a0 The fumes in the upper levels diffuse through the exterior timber walls to the outside of the structure, and also through\u00a0open doors and\u00a0windows.<\/p>\n Often times near the completion of a forensic engineering investigation there is a need to plan and design repair of the damaged or failed structure, and then estimate the cost of the repair.\u00a0 This repair cost contributes to an evaluation of the damages claimed in a lawsuit.\u00a0 Occasionally the repair is constructed involving engineering supervision and inspection costs, which also contribute to the damages.<\/p>\n Types of reports<\/i><\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n The report, in particular, the written\u00a0report,\u00a0is an important step in a professional engineer\u2019s investigation of a failure or an accident.\u00a0 It is an objective documentation for the judicial system of the methods used during the investigation, the data gathered, the analysis of the data, and the reasoning to an opinion on cause.\u00a0 It’s importance is highlighted by the fact that civil litigation rule changes in some provinces are\u00a0limiting discovery of the expert.<\/p>\n The results of a professional engineer\u2019s investigation of a failure or an accident are presented in:<\/p>\n Oral report<\/i><\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n If possible, an oral report is given to\u00a0counsel as soon after the documents are read, an initial site visit and visual assessment\u00a0completed, and an initial hypothesis formed as to cause.\u00a0 The report will indicate the direction the investigation appears to be leading.\u00a0 This will\u00a0give counsel an\u00a0early indication as to whether the\u00a0professional engineer will serve as a consulting expert or as a testifying expert.<\/p>\n Written report<\/i><\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n A written report is provided at completion of the investigation.\u00a0 It is prepared on instruction of counsel for the court and judge and submitted to counsel.<\/p>\n Serious thought must be given to having a written report prepared. This is because non-technical counsel and judges are wordsmiths and benefit from well documented data and argument – and usually like well written reports as I have found on more than one occasion.\u00a0 Else why are civil procedure rules being struck to encourage the preparation of reports and limit expert discovery?\u00a0 To save time and expense I\u2019m sure but I also suspect because the judicial system\u00a0likes a well written report.<\/p>\n I know of two cases where junior counsel decided against well prepared reports.\u00a0 In the one case because of the perceived expense by\u00a0counsel \u2013 and\u00a0yet it was the first thing the judge asked for, and\u00a0counsel’s case struggled thereafter, cost more, and may have\u00a0resulted in\u00a0significantly lower damages being awarded.<\/p>\n In the second case, counsel submitted a report containing\u00a0the results of interviews.\u00a0 The interviews\u00a0resulted in a poorly prepared report\u00a0because there was no\u00a0evidence to validate the interviews which\u00a0I understand constitutes hearsay in law.\u00a0 Counsel neglected to call witnesses supporting the hearsay evidence and lost his case.\u00a0 Both cases\u00a0seemed to be\u00a0open and shut cases for the counsels involved.<\/p>\n Supplementary reports<\/i><\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n The need for supplementary reports\u00a0might depend on whether or not new evidence is\u00a0found during discovery, in follow-up investigations, or presented in rebuttal reports.<\/p>\n Reports, in general, might identify appropriate graphics, models, demonstrations, etc. to explain the investigation and findings to lay technical people.<\/p>\n Report outline<\/i><\/strong><\/span><\/i><\/b><\/p>\n The outline of a report will vary depending on the nature of the failure or accident\u00a0and the extent of the investigation.\u00a0 Many will be in chronological order, generally the order of the steps in the forensic engineering investigative process.\u00a0 The process is a series of investigations and follow-up investigations that in turn are comprised of different tasks.\u00a0 My reports generally:<\/p>\n ***<\/p>\n (This\u00a0update of an item posted in 2012 identifies investigative tasks like assessing the standard of care existing at the time a structure was designed and constructed or an accident happened.<\/p>\n The update\u00a0was actually prompted by a long and very difficult assessment of\u00a0the standard of care in a case, and the realization that assessing standard of care was an\u00a0important – and sometimes difficult, step in the forensic engineering investigative process.<\/p>\n The update\u00a0also provides sources in the\u00a0following References <\/strong>for follow-up and gives data in an Appendix<\/strong>\u00a0on the difficulty of estimating the cost of forensic engineering investigation)<\/p>\n The foregoing is based on several sources in addition to my own experience.\u00a0 The citations are not complete:<\/p>\n (The following is adapted from a posting to this blog site www.ericjorden.com\/blog<\/a> on November 1, 2012 entitled, \u201cThe cost of forensic engineering investigation\u201d)<\/p>\n Difficulty estimating the cost of forensic engineering investigation in Atlantic Canada <\/strong>(the items in bold are the main steps in a forensic engineering investigation).<\/p>\n The following is a subjective assessment of the difficulty estimating the costs of\u00a0the steps in\u00a0the forensic engineering investigative process\u00a0(see foregoing item).\u00a0 The more difficult the step the less accurate the estimate.<\/p>\n The cost assessment at the start of an investigation assumes the request is made of\u00a0a professional\u00a0engineer after\u00a0he\u00a0has been contacted, the\u00a0failure briefly described, and the documents identified that counsel will provide.<\/p>\n The assessment is based on my experience in the forensic engineering investigation of failures in the built and natural environments, and fatalities and personal injury accidents, in Atlantic Canada and overseas:<\/p>\n Add to this difficulty of estimating\u00a0the\u00a0costs of a forensic\u00a0engineering investigation,\u00a0the difficulty\u00a0of estimating the costs of the role of the expert\u00a0in the different stages\u00a0of the civil\u00a0litigation process.\u00a0 This\u00a0compounds the problem\u00a0further for counsel and the expert.<\/p>\n For example, how, at the start of an action,\u00a0do you estimate the cost of answering the questions posed\u00a0under Rule 55 (in Nova Scotia) not knowing how many there will be\u00a0nor their complexity?<\/p>\n I was asked in a case not too long\u00a0ago to answer\u00a046 numbered questions\u00a0submitted by opposing counsel.\u00a0\u00a0On counting, and including\u00a0important sub-questions, there were\u00a0actually 77\u00a0questions.\u00a0 The cost of answering these questions was approximately 13% of the total cost of my involvement as an expert in this litigation.<\/p>\n\n\n (Posted by Eric E. Jorden, M.Sc., P.Eng. Consulting Professional Engineer, Forensic Engineer, Geotechnology Ltd., Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada. July 15, 2013 ejorden@eastlink.ca<\/span><\/strong>) <\/em><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" Introduction Counsel, and insurance claim managers and adjusters benefit when they have knowledge of the forensic investigation that is carried out by a professional engineer.\u00a0 The investigation determines why – the cause – a structure failed or did not perform … Continue reading \n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
1.<\/b> Document\u00a0Review<\/b><\/h1>\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
2.<\/b> Visual Assessment<\/b><\/h1>\n
\n
3.<\/b> Field\u00a0Investigations<\/b><\/h1>\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
4.<\/b> Laboratory\u00a0Investigations<\/b><\/h1>\n
5. Research<\/h1>\n
6.<\/b> Follow-up Investigations<\/b><\/h1>\n
7.<\/b> Data\u00a0Analysis and Formulation of\u00a0Opinion<\/b><\/h1>\n
8. Repair and remediation<\/b><\/h1>\n
9.<\/b> Report<\/h1>\n
\n
\n
References<\/b><\/h1>\n
\n
Appendix<\/b><\/h1>\n
Difficulty estimating costs<\/h1>\n
\n