Introduction to Forensic Engineering

Chapter 1
Learning Outcomes (LO)
At the end of this chapter, students should be:
1. Able to explain the technical terms & circumstances
associated with forensic engineering.
2. Able to identify some historical precedence of
construction failures.
3. Able to explain the ethical & professional
responsibilities of an engineer.
Comprehensive Definition
 Forensic Engineering is the application of the art and
science of engineering in the jurisprudence system,
requiring the services of legally qualified professional
engineers. Forensic engineering may include investigation
of the physical causes of accidents and other sources of
claims and litigation, preparation of engineering reports,
testimony at hearings and trials in administrative or
judicial proceedings, and the rendition of advisory
opinions to assist the resolution of disputes affecting life
or property.

Milton F. Lunch, former General Counsel to the National Society of

Professional Engineers (NSPE)
Condensed Definition
 Forensic Engineering is the art and science of professional
practice of those qualified to serve as engineering experts
in matters before courts of law or in arbitration
proceedings

Marvin M. Specter, founding President

of the National Academy of Forensic Engineers (NAFE)
Forensic Engineer
 Definition:The forensic engineer is a professional
engineer who deals with the engineering aspects of legal
problems.
 Forensic engineers are at the forefront in developing
alternative dispute resolution techniques. Often they
serve as consultants in arbitration, mediation, mini trials
and other procedures.
 Often the forensic engineer works for attorneys
representing plaintiffs or defendants, who may be
individual parties, corporations, or governmental agencies.
 In some cases, the forensic engineer works independently,
using consultants as required.
A forensic engineer:
 assesses what was there before the event, and the
condition it was in prior to the event.
 assesses what is present after the event, and in what
condition it is in.
 hypothesizes plausible ways in which the pre-event
conditions can become the post-event conditions.
 searches for evidence that either denies or supports the
various hypotheses.
 applies engineering knowledge and skill to relate the
various facts and evidence into a cohesive scenario of
how the event may have occurred.
Qualification of the Forensic Engineer
 Technical competency- the result of education and
experience.
 Knowledge of legal procedure and related vocabulary.
 Detective skills- Diligence, interpretation of data,
research, protection of evidence, act fast, flexible and
resilient personality.
 Oral and written communication skills.
 Other skills- psychology, sociology, photographic, etc
 Personality characteristic- high ethical standard, flexibility,
confidence,
 Work effectively with others.
Application of Logic
 Logic provides order and coherence to all the facts,
principles, and methodologies affecting a particular
case.

Investigation pyramid
Accident Reconstruction/Failure Analysis
 Failures and accidents involving injury, loss of life, or
property damage nearly always generate controversy.
Hence, the investigation of such events is usually
associated with litigation or the threat of litigation.
 Accident investigation and reconstruction, however, need
not always be directly related to litigation. Sometimes the
principal purpose of accident reconstruction is to
determine causation so that the accident will not be
repeated.
 It is important to note that although the typical forensic
investigation is conducted under the threat of litigation,
very few cases actually go to the courtroom
The Scientific Method
 A general rule or conclusion is established based on an
accumulation of evidence obtained by making many
observations and gathering many corroborative facts.
 In assessing all these observations and facts, an underlying
commonality is shown to exist that demonstrates a
principle or proposition.
Expert Witness
 A person who is qualified to give an opinion in a case
based on his or her knowledge, skill, experience, training,
or education. An expert witness assists the jury in
understanding certain aspects of a case that may be
outside the common person’s scope of experience and
knowledge.
 In some cases, multiple experts may need to testify to
explain complicated issues.
 It is the obligation of an expert to perform in a
professional manner and serve without bias.
Recommended Practice
 The expert should avoid conflicts of interest and the appearance of
conflicts of interest.
 The expert should undertake an engagement only when qualified to
do so, and should rely upon other qualified parties for assistance in
matters which are beyond the expert’s area of expertise.
 The expert should consider other practitioners’ opinions relative to
the principles associated with the matter at issue.
 The expert should obtain available information relative to the events
in question in order to minimize reliance on assumptions, and
should be prepared to explain any assumptions to the trier of fact.
 The expert should evaluate reasonable explanations of causes and
effects.
 The expert should strive to assure the integrity of tests and
investigations conducted as part of the expert’s services
Cont’d
 The expert witness should testify about professional standards of care
only with knowledge of those standards which prevailed at the time in
question, based upon reasonable inquiry.
 The expert witness should use only those illustrative devices or
presentations which simplify or clarify an issue.
 The expert should maintain custody and control over whatever materials
are entrusted to the expert’s care.
 The expert should respect confidentiality about an assignment.
 The expert should refuse or terminate involvement in an engagement
when fee is used in an attempt to compromise the expert’s judgment.
 The expert should refuse or terminate involvement in an engagement
when the expert is not permitted to perform the investigation which the
expert believes is necessary to render an opinion with a reasonable
degree of certainty.
 The expert witness should strive to maintain a professional demeanor and
be dispassionate at all times
Malaysia Court System
Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR)
 Disputes review board (DRB)
 Mediation
 Minitrial
 Arbitration
Disputes review board (DRB)
 The requirement for a DRB is included in the contract documents,
and the owner, contractor, and members of a DRB sign a three-party
agreement obligating them to use the DRB to attempt to resolve
disputes while construction is ongoing.
 Typically, the DRB receives copies of the contract documents, makes
a project inspection tour, meets periodically at the site, and is kept
informed of project developments. In the event a discrepancy occurs
that the owner and contractor cannot settle on their own, the DRB
will hear both sides of the argument at a meeting and produce a
written recommendation for resolving the dispute. Although the
decision is not binding, the parties usually defer to the judgment of
the board; to do otherwise would defeat the purpose of having a
DRB. The parties have had an opportunity to be heard, and they
recognize that the DRB members have technical expertise and a
firsthand understanding of the project.
Mediation
 Mediation is the process of settling disputes through
conferences conducted by a neutral third party who
facilitates negotiation.
 Mediation is the method of handling disputes which
provides the greatest opportunity for win/win solutions.
And, because the parties arrive at the solution, there is a
very high probability that the solution will be carried out
as agreed.
 Decision legally non-binding.
Minitrial
 The minitrial is a structured mediation proceeding. Like mediation, it
is a private and non-binding procedure.
 At the minitrial, each party to a dispute makes a summary
presentation of its case to a joint panel made up of a management
person from each side. The panel members must have the authority
to negotiate and approve settlements.
 A minitrial has two distinct parts; the first is the information
exchange between the parties (both before and during the minitrial
itself), and the second intensive negotiations between the parties.
 A minitrial is a sophisticated form of settlement conference,
combining elements of private negotiation, mediation, and
adjudication. The theory behind minitrials is that many disputes are
primarily business problems and not legal problems. These disputes
are best settled through prompt negotiation involving executives of
the disputing businesses.
Arbitration
 Arbitration is a proceeding in which a dispute is resolved by an
impartial adjudicator whose decision the parties to the dispute
have agreed, or legislation has decreed, will be final and
binding.
 Arbitration can be either voluntary or mandatory.
 The difference between mediation and arbitration is that
parties maintain full control of the workings and outcome of
the mediation; whereas in arbitration the arbitrator decides
the outcome of the proceedings and the parties are bound by
that decision. Arbitration is similar to court proceedings in that
the arbitrator (like the judge) will decide the dispute; the
difference is that parties can decide on the appointment of the
arbitrator and the rules and procedures to be applied in the
arbitration.
Controversial judicial decision
 Dissenting viewpoints among competent forensic
engineers are common. Disagreement does not
necessarily imply dishonesty or incompetence on the part
of one of the witnesses. Often there is no single truth.
Failures and accidents often result from a number of
complex, interrelated factors. An honest expression of
diversity of opinion, through the introduction of
testimony by multiple experts, is a healthy approach to
seeking truth. It is important to give consideration to all
contributing factors.
 It is important to remember that the underlying purpose
of litigation is to settle arguments, not to establish
ultimate truth.
Code of Professional Conduct
clr. no.3/2005
Professional Liability
 Tort
❑ A wrongful act (civil wrong) or an infringement of a right
leading to civil legal liability.
❑ Negligence - primary basis of professional liability.
Standard of Care of an Engineer
 In a lawsuit, a civil engineer can be held negligent if he or she
violated the standard of care which resulted in damage or
injury.
 Standard/duty of care: That degree of learning and skill that the
law requires all professionals to exhibit and which is ordinarily
possessed by professionals in good standing in that profession
in the same locality and under similar circumstances.
 The expert witness must take into account the following
factors when determining if the civil engineer meets the
standard of care.
1. Learning and skill
2. The location of practice
3. The availability of facilities
4. The civil engineers qualifies as a specialist
Historical Cases of Failure
Collapse of Tacoma Narrow Bridge
7 November 1940
Hyatt Regency Walkway Collapse
July 17, 1981
Point Pleasant Bridge Collapse
December 15,1967
Learning from Failure
 The forensic engineer can make a significant contribution to
the process of learning from failures by disseminating
information.
 The tradition of learning lessons from experience, including
failure, continues to be important to the advancement of the
engineering profession to the design professions.
 Design codes, standards of practice, and construction and
manufacturing procedures have all evolved traditionally
through a process of trial-and-error and trial-and-success.
 Henry Petroski writes that no one wants to learn by mistakes,
but we cannot learn enough from successes to go beyond the
state-of-the-art [Petroski 1985, 1994].
To Engineer is Human
References books