http://kineticorp.com Forensic Engineering and Visualization Tue, 27 Jun 2017 16:01:57 +0000 en-US hourly 1 https://wordpress.org/?v=4.8 http://kineticorp.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/06/cropped-favicon-32x32.jpg http://kineticorp.com 32 32 Case Study – Missing Washer http://kineticorp.com/case-study-missing-washer/ Tue, 13 Jun 2017 12:56:48 +0000 http://kineticorp.com/?p=5511 5 years after a car accident occurred, Kineticorp was hired to help the service department of an auto dealer accused of forgetting a washer while servicing a truck’s breaks. Kineticorp found crucial evidence exonerating the service department demonstrating our unparalleled attention to detail and commitment to finding out what really… read more →

The post Case Study – Missing Washer appeared first on .

]]>

5 years after a car accident occurred, Kineticorp was hired to help the service department of an auto dealer accused of forgetting a washer while servicing a truck’s breaks. Kineticorp found crucial evidence exonerating the service department demonstrating our unparalleled attention to detail and commitment to finding out what really happened.

This case study tells that story.

The post Case Study – Missing Washer appeared first on .

]]>
Data Acquisition Using Smartphones http://kineticorp.com/data-acquisition-using-smartphones/ Fri, 09 Jun 2017 21:00:31 +0000 http://kineticorp.com/?p=5503 People use smartphone and fitness apps everyday to track their accomplishments in distance, time, calories, and heart rate. In order to track this data, these apps also track acceleration and speed, two measurements utilized in accident reconstruction. Kineticorp Accident Reconstructionists wanted to understand the accuracy of these apps to determine… read more →

The post Data Acquisition Using Smartphones appeared first on .

]]>

People use smartphone and fitness apps everyday to track their accomplishments in distance, time, calories, and heart rate. In order to track this data, these apps also track acceleration and speed, two measurements utilized in accident reconstruction. Kineticorp Accident Reconstructionists wanted to understand the accuracy of these apps to determine if they could be utilized when reconstructing accidents. They tested 3 different apps against a VBox in 3 different scenarios, motorcycle, bike, and roller blades. Kineticorp Accident Reconstructionists could understand the reliability of the data these apps provide.

Their official SAE publication can be found at (papers.sae.org/2016-01-1461/).
For general inquiry email contact@kineticorp.com

Authors:
William Neale (linkedin.com/in/williamneale)
David Danaher (kineticorp.com/personnel-group/david-danaher/)
Sean McDonough (linkedin.com/in/sean-mcdonough-25a70272)
Tomas Owens (linkedin.com/in/tomas-owens-47397025)

The post Data Acquisition Using Smartphones appeared first on .

]]>
Lug Stud Analysis and Forensic Application http://kineticorp.com/lug-nut-analysis/ Thu, 08 Jun 2017 20:55:13 +0000 http://kineticorp.com/?p=5483 When protruding Lug Studs sideswipe the side of another vehicle, specific geometric patterns appear. What happens when two wheels sideswipe during an accident? The resulting patterns may be analyzed and attributed to vehicle speeds and behavior before during and after an accident. Kineticorp’s Will Bortles discusses his research and explains… read more →

The post Lug Stud Analysis and Forensic Application appeared first on .

]]>

When protruding Lug Studs sideswipe the side of another vehicle, specific geometric patterns appear. What happens when two wheels sideswipe during an accident?

The resulting patterns may be analyzed and attributed to vehicle speeds and behavior before during and after an accident.

Kineticorp’s Will Bortles discusses his research and explains the implementation his findings have on the world of Accident Reconstruction.

 

The post Lug Stud Analysis and Forensic Application appeared first on .

]]>
Motorcycle Headlamp Research http://kineticorp.com/motorcycle-headlamp-research/ Thu, 08 Jun 2017 17:29:37 +0000 http://kineticorp.com/?p=5477 Kineticorp’s Nathan McKelvey discusses motorcycle headlamp research and how this research pertains to accident cases.

The post Motorcycle Headlamp Research appeared first on .

]]>
Kineticorp’s Nathan McKelvey discusses motorcycle headlamp research and how this research pertains to accident cases.

The post Motorcycle Headlamp Research appeared first on .

]]>
Vehicle Scans http://kineticorp.com/vehicle-scans/ Wed, 07 Jun 2017 20:24:20 +0000 http://kineticorp.com/?p=5472 3D vehicle scans have become a vital component in accurate and credible accident reconstruction. Sean McDonough shares a bit about our procedure in acquiring vehicle exemplar scans. For any further information on our scanning capabilities or our procedures, please contact Sean McDonough.

The post Vehicle Scans appeared first on .

]]>

3D vehicle scans have become a vital component in accurate and credible accident reconstruction. Sean McDonough shares a bit about our procedure in acquiring vehicle exemplar scans.

For any further information on our scanning capabilities or our procedures, please contact Sean McDonough.

The post Vehicle Scans appeared first on .

]]>
Center of Gravity Height Analysis http://kineticorp.com/center-gravity-height-analysis/ Tue, 06 Jun 2017 14:47:35 +0000 http://kineticorp.com/?p=5451   In this Kineticorp research video, Neal Carter, Martin Randolph and Nathan Rose calculate the Center of Gravity Height Analysis of a large SUV. This analysis will aid in the reconstruction of roll over cases and other applicable instances. “When we are analyzing a roll over case, for instance, that… read more →

The post Center of Gravity Height Analysis appeared first on .

]]>
 

In this Kineticorp research video, Neal Carter, Martin Randolph and Nathan Rose calculate the Center of Gravity Height Analysis of a large SUV. This analysis will aid in the reconstruction of roll over cases and other applicable instances.

“When we are analyzing a roll over case, for instance, that is the type of crash where we would use the center of gravity height analysis.” – Nathan Rose

Video Transcription

Often times, when we need to know the center of gravity for a vehicle, it’s sufficient for us just to estimate that with equations or data from the literature. But, sometimes we get cases where we need to know it more precisely and in those cases we can do an experiment like this. So, today we have an exemplar vehicle and we are going to go through a procedure to determine where the center of gravity for this particular vehicle is. With this process we’re looking at how changing the angular orientation of the vehicle shifts weight. We are going to elevate the front end of the vehicle. When we do that, weight of the vehicle will shift to the back axle and from that weight shift we can calculate the center of gravity height. In this procedure, we’re using our 3D laser scanners to document the motion of the vehicle body in relationship to the vehicle suspension. As we elevate the front end of the vehicle, not only does weight shift, but the body also moves relative to the suspension and we need to quantify that in our procedure. We often need to know where the center of gravity of the vehicle is so that would be the center of gravity, where it is between the wheels, front to back and then also, the height of the center of gravity. And often times that’ll play into our analysis, if we’re doing a simulation especially, in terms of how the vehicle moves in response to driver steering inputs; where the center of gravity could play a role in that. When we are analyzing a rollover crash, for instance, that is the type of crash where we would use the center of gravity height in our analysis.

 

The post Center of Gravity Height Analysis appeared first on .

]]>
7 Principles For Creating Credible and Admissible Forensic Animations http://kineticorp.com/7-principles-creating-credible-admissible-forensic-animations/ Tue, 23 May 2017 21:18:17 +0000 http://kineticorp.com/?p=5376 by Nathan Rose, Director and Principal at Kineticorp   An animation can provide tremendous value to a jury by making an expert’s opinions more understandable. In this article, I will give you 7 principles for producing credible and admissible animations for use in depositions, mediations, settlement conferences, and trials. These… read more →

The post 7 Principles For Creating Credible and Admissible Forensic Animations appeared first on .

]]>
by Nathan Rose, Director and Principal at Kineticorp

 

An animation can provide tremendous value to a jury by making an expert’s opinions more understandable. In this article, I will give you 7 principles for producing credible and admissible animations for use in depositions, mediations, settlement conferences, and trials.

These are the same principles that I and others in my firm have used to develop numerous animations that have been admitted in trials across the United States.

AN EXAMPLE OF A CREDIBLE AND ADMISSIBLE ANIMATION

Here is an example of the type of animation I’m addressing:

HOW WOULD I KNOW?!

I am a director and principal accident reconstructionist at Kineticorp in Denver, Colorado. We specialize in accident reconstruction and visualization and have used animations to explain technical concepts to juries on many occasions.

We have consistently had our animations admitted.

My own personal expertise is in the area of vehicular accident reconstruction, and so, I’m going to develop this article from that perspective. However, these principles are applicable to other types of animations as well. For example, Graves gives the example of using an animation to explain the inner-workings of a handgun [2000].

PRINCIPLE #1 – CREATE PROPERLY SCALED VEHICLE AND SCENE MODELS

In a litigation context, animations are often intended to be a demonstrative exhibit to help an expert explain their opinions. Modern jurors are sophisticated and accustomed to high-quality television, video, and animation production. They are accustomed to a high level of physical realism, and so, realism in an animation will help to build credibility for an animation.

Physical realism begins with having objects in the animation that are correctly sized relative to one another. Jurors will perceive errors in scale and this will give them cause to doubt the credibility of the animation.

Beyond the benefit to the jury, the process of putting together an animation in an accurately-scaled computer environment can help the expert to develop their opinions by helping them to understand how objects fit together and interact [Hull, 1992; Fay, 1996]. An example would be analysis of how two vehicles collided by creating accurately-scaled models of the vehicles and their damage in a computer animation software package. Another example would be using correctly scaled objects to evaluate geometric visibility for a driver in an accident.

PRINCIPLE #2 – CONNECT THE ANIMATION TO THE PHYSICAL EVIDENCE

Oftentimes, the animations that I am showing in a trial depict a car crash. Car crashes typically leave physical evidence – tire marks, gouges, debris, and vehicle damage. The vehicle rest positions are also typically known. The vehicle motion that I show in an animation will be credible to the extent that it is consistent with the physical evidence and explains how that evidence was actually created.

In other words, when I analyze a crash, I’m using the physical evidence to determine what happened. The animation that I create out of that process should reveal to the jury how that evidence was created – my explanation for that evidence. I want to give the jury a trial exhibit that helps them understand the case better.

If my animation helps the jurors understand the physical evidence better, then it will provide them with value. And, of course, the value an animation provides to a jury is one of the criteria for its admissibility (see Jones [1991] and Hull [1996], for instance).

PRINCIPLE #3 – CONNECT THE ANIMATION TO THE EYE-WITNESS STATEMENTS AND TESTIMONY

Most every accident reconstructionist will tell you that eye-witnesses are not good at estimating times, speeds, and distances. That should, of course, be acknowledged. However, the stories that witnesses tell about an accident can sometimes be very credible.

An accident reconstructionist should not dismiss the story that a witness tells without some systematic examination of that story. If physical evidence and physics compel an accident reconstructionist to dismiss what a witness says, fine. Otherwise, the animation should be as consistent with that testimony as possible – within the confines of physics and physical evidence. (For more related to this principle, see my article Use Physics and Evidence to Test What Witnesses Say About a Crash)

PRINCIPLE #4 – BUILD THE ANIMATION WITH PRINCIPLES OF PHYSICS

Again, modern jurors are accustomed to physical realism in the media they consume. In an animation of a vehicular crash, the motion of the vehicles is going to be perceived as more realistic if that motion is grounded in physics. In the animation I showed at the beginning of this article, much of the vehicle motion was produced using a software package called PC-Crash, a physics based accident simulation software. This physics-based motion gives the animation credibility because the motion of the vehicles looks and feels right. (Here is a link to a recent court ruling admitting analysis with PC-Crash: http://www.kineticorp.com/pc-crash-ruling.pdf)

As Grimes [1992] has noted: “Unfortunately, the word ‘animation’ is often associated with cartoons, where objects are not bound to the laws of physics. In contrast, an accurate depiction of a collision requires the animation to be consistent with the physical laws-of-motion. Computer animation requires sufficient data to produce all the images of the vehicle traveling through the collision scene. Therefore, credible animations must be based upon a detailed reconstruction of the collision sequence.” In 1994, Grimes proposed the term “scientific animation” to describe an animation in which the objects are properly scaled and the depicted motion obeys the laws of physics. Also in 1994, Day used the term “scientific visualization” to refer to animations in which the underlying vehicle motion is generated by a physics-based simulation software package. In 1998, Grimes defined scientific visualization as “a computer animation in which the motion of the primary objects is based on scientific analysis or scientifically accurate equations.” By this definition, the animation I showed at the beginning of this article is a scientific visualization.

(See Martin [1991] for a dated, but still relevant application of this principle. See Massa [1996] for sample techniques related to critiquing the physical realism of an animation.)

PRINCIPLE #5 – INCORPORATE THE ELECTRONIC EVIDENCE

Many vehicles now record electronic crash-related data and analysis of this data is usually a part of an accident reconstruction. The engine control module on the semi-tractor in the animation I started this article with recorded crash related data (speed, for instance) and we were able to use that data in producing the motion of this tractor for the animation. This essentially relates back to the principle of tying the animation to the physical and testimonial evidence.

The electronic data on modern vehicles is another source of evidence about the crash and an animation that is consistent with the known evidence will be more credible than one that is not.

PRINCIPLE #6 – PAY ATTENTION TO SECONDARY DETAILS

Car crashes occur at a particular time and place. Including accurate secondary details about the scene, such as road signs, vegetation, correct lighting, and logos on vehicles can add credibility to an animation. In the animation I showed at the beginning of this article, I have removed a number of the secondary details. However, if I was showing this animation in a trial, these details would be included. This is mostly a physical realism issue. It is important to distinguish between primary and secondary details – or essential and nonessential details [Hull, 1996]. Animations can be reliable and admissible without the secondary (non-essential) details. However, including these secondary details will help orient the jury and will give the jury a sense that that you understand the context in which a crash occurred [Grimes, 1992 and 1994].

Grimes [1998] distinguishes between primary and secondary details as follows: “The basic difference is that primary objects are important to the purpose of the presentation and secondary objects are only for helping orient the audience.”

PRINCIPLE #7 – PRESENT THE PRODUCTION PROCESS IN A TRANSPARENT WAY

While physical realism can add credibility to an animation, a jury should not be left with the impression that they are actually watching the real events. Animations are often a demonstrative exhibit that illustrates an expert’s opinions. A transparent presentation of the process through which the animation was created will help the jury understand the accident better, but will not leave them with a misunderstanding of what they are actually watching. By a transparent presentation, here’s what I mean: present the physical evidence, present your analysis of the physical evidence, present how you have brought principles of physics to bear on the physical evidence, and then present how physical evidence and physics flow directly into the animation.

Transparent presentation of the process also helps lay the foundation for an animation, making it more likely to be admitted. Along these lines, Grimes [1998] argues that “any presentation that is presumed to be based on scientific principles should be thoroughly documented such that a similarly qualified person can reproduce the findings.” Fay [1997] covers several examples of cases in which animations were either admitted and excluded.

by Nathan Rose, Director and Principal at Kineticorp

 

References

  1. Day, Terry D., “The Scientific Visualization of Motor Vehicle Accidents,” SAE Technical Paper Number 940922, doi:10.4271/940922.
  2. Fay, R.J., Gardner, J., “Analytical Applications of 3-D Imaging in Vehicle Accident Studies,” SAE Technical Paper Number 960648, doi:10.4271/960648. [Fay discusses analytical purposes for animations that go beyond illustrating an expert’s opinions.]
  3. Fay, R.J., “Computer Images and Animations in Court,” SAE Technical Paper Number 970965, doi:10.4271/970965.
  4. Galves, Fred, “Where the Not-So-Wild Things Are: Computers in the Courtroom, The Federal Rules of Evidence, and the Need for Institutional Reform and More Judicial Acceptance,” Harvard Journal of Law and Technology, Volume 13, Number 2, Winter 2000.
  5. Grimes, W.D., “Computer Animation Techniques for Use in Collision Reconstruction,” SAE Technical Paper 920755, doi:10.4271/920755.
  6. Grimes, W.D., “Classifying the Elements of a Scientific Animation,” SAE Technical Paper 940919, doi:10.4271/940919.
  7. Grimes, W.D., Dickerson, C.P., Smith, C.D., “Documenting Scientific Visualizations and Computer Animations Used in Collision Reconstruction Presentations,” SAE Technical Paper 980018, 1998, doi:10.4271/980018.
  8. Hull, W.C., Newton, B.E., “The Animation Computer as a 3-D Reconstruction Tool,” SAE Technical Paper 920754, 1992, doi:10.4271/920754.
  9. Hull, W.C., Newton, B.E., Macaw, C.R., Miller, R.R., “Functional Classifications and Critique Methods for Litigation Support/Accident Reconstruction Animations,” SAE Technical Paper 960651, 1995, doi:10.4271/960651.
  10. Jones, Ian S., Muir, D.W., Groo, Stephen W., “Computer Animation – Admissibility in the Courtroom,” SAE Technical Paper 910366, 1991, doi:10.4271/910366.
  11. Martin, K.F., Banister, J.A., Piziali, R.L., “Engineering Visualization of Vehicle Accidents: Data Sources and Methods of Production,” SAE Technical Paper 910369, 1991, doi:10.4271/910369.
  12. Massa, David J., “Using Computer Reverse Projection Photogrammetry to Analyze an Animation,” SAE Technical Paper 1999-01-0093, 1999, doi:10.4271/1999-01-0093.
  13. McLay, R.W., Kiely, S.J., Sheehan, M.L., “Case Studies in Animation Foundation,” SAE Technical Paper 940920, 1994, doi:10.4271/940920. [McLay discusses purposes for animations other than simply illustrating an expert’s opinions.]

The post 7 Principles For Creating Credible and Admissible Forensic Animations appeared first on .

]]>
Forensic Acquisition of Vehicle Infotainment Systems Data http://kineticorp.com/forensic-acquisition-vehicle-infotainment-systems-data/ Fri, 07 Apr 2017 21:36:04 +0000 http://kineticorp.com/?p=5271 Last week, Nathan Rose sat down with Will Bortles of Kineticorp to discuss the research he just published at the 2017 Society of Automotive Engineers World Congress. Here is a transcript of their discussion and what this research means to accident reconstruction. This research relates to methods for acquiring data from… read more →

The post Forensic Acquisition of Vehicle Infotainment Systems Data appeared first on .

]]>
Last week, Nathan Rose sat down with Will Bortles of Kineticorp to discuss the research he just published at the 2017 Society of Automotive Engineers World Congress. Here is a transcript of their discussion and what this research means to accident reconstruction. This research relates to methods for acquiring data from passenger vehicle infotainment systems. Data from these systems is beginning to be used by accident investigators and reconstructionists, particularly in criminal case settings

Enjoy!


Nathan: My intent today is to give other accident reconstructionists a snapshot of what you’ve been working on. This, I think, is an area that’s going to be potentially big in the future. We’re talking about data that could be mined off of infotainment and telematics systems on vehicles.

Will: Yeah, that’s correct.

Nathan: So, what vehicles specifically should people be thinking about that might have data on them?

Will: Vehicles that would really scream at me that this technology’s available, are vehicles with high end trim packages. So, if you have the touch button navigation, the integration of the Bluetooth – those are the types of systems that we see more advanced telematics systems, more advanced infotainment systems where you get the navigation.

Nathan: With event data recorders, we tend to think of it in terms of manufacturers.

Will: Manufacturers and models.

Nathan: Yeah, right. Is this similar? Or is it just, it’s not so much a manufacturer thing, it’s more of a, if one of these infotainment systems is on there that has these capabilities, and hey if it does we can give it a shot and see if we can get data off of it.

Will: It’s both. First, it has to do with whether or not you have the sophisticated infotainment systems. Second, Berla, the manufacturer of the hardware and software system that we use for the data acquistions, has only been able to reverse engineer or to extract data from certain makes and models. So it’s a two-fold thing, first you’ve got to be in the right generation of vehicles. You usually start to see this data becoming available in about model year 2008. That is when the iPhone really caught on, so the automotive manufacturers collectively started to make their vehicles more compatible with smartphones. Second, you’ve got to have the right hardware in the vehicle, so that becomes vehicle make and model specific.

Nathan: Right, and that brings up an interesting point. This capability is being developed by Berla…

Will: Right.

Nathan: It’s not authorized by the auto manufacturers, right?

Will: Right.

Nathan: So, what is the stance of the auto manufacturers towards this? Are they against it? Are they okay with it?

Will: I don’t know one way or another. They certainly don’t promote it. We’re actually going through some pretty extraordinary, physically the data acquisition process is pretty extraordinary, it’s pretty invasive. I’m thinking specifically of the GM modules where you have to go in, disassemble the dash, take the module out, take the motherboard out of the actual module. And then you have a little fiberglass pen, and you have to scratch away the solder mask just to be able to make contact with the wires to extract the data. So, it’s certainly not plug-in-play, it’s very invasive…

Nathan: Is there a list of say, three, four, five things you could give us that this is the type of data we would typically be able to access?

Will: The most prevalent data is cell phone stuff, that pretty much goes across all vehicles, for BMW, for Fiat Chrysler vehicles, GM vehicles, Ford vehicles that – you sync up your phone to the vehicle. It helps to think about what you’re doing inside the vehicle and that helps you understand the data that’s being collected. If you plug in your phone, you allow it to download your contact list in order to do a speed dial, well now you realized that you’ve pushed that contact information to the vehicle. That information is now being stored on your car because now you have your phone list where you could just say, “Call home”, “Call the wife”, “Call the office”…

Nathan: So, could you get a call history out of the…?

Will: Exactly.

Nathan: Now tell me about the GPS data, is it only if the navigation system is being utilized?

Will: In my testing it was opposite actually. So, for some vehicles they’ll have – you predefine certain locations or routes. For instance, you may have your office addressed predefined, you have your home address predefined, you have certain stores or places that you go and those are stored as ‘Locations.’ When you program those addresses into the vehicle it knows that and it stores it that data. For example, you tell your vehicle: here’s where daycare is, here’s where my kid’s school is, here’s where my office is. That’s one of the locations that you can put in there, then there’s another data set called a ‘Route.’ Which is, every morning you stop at Starbucks and then you go drop a kid off, and then you go to work, and if you program that as a route, that’ll be stored in the vehicle that way. So ‘Locations’ and ‘Routes’ are listing of addresses.

The other GPS data element, what I think is the more exciting, or the more applicable GPS data for an investigation is what they call ‘Track Logs.’ Which is, on such and such a date, you were here, and then you were here, and then you were here, so it’s just a little breadcrumb trail of GPS coordinates– a data sample of about one per second. Based on our research, I havent fully figured out the data arbitration on that. I don’t know why certain ‘Track Logs’ are being saved and certain ‘Track Logs’ are not saved. The paper that I’m going to present, we recovered several ‘Track Logs’ from the vehicle. However, some of our test runs were not stored or recovered.

We did a whole battery of testing, which we were testing the doors, the lights, the phone activity. We were testing gear shift events – so we were just out in the parking lot, driving forward, stopping, putting it in reverse. Driving forward, putting it in second gear, driving in reverse. We were able to recover several ‘Track Logs’ of that driving, just back and forth in the office while we tested the gear shifts. Ultimately, we instrumented the vehicle with the V-Box Sport and drove around to emulate normal day-to-day driving. We drove first down towards to the Park Meadows mall, so we were doing mixed highway and surface street driving. Then we stopped and then did some surface driving down County Line Road, and then we starting coming and making our way back towards the office.

For that testing, we did five total runs. The first four runs, we were using the GPS – hey “take us to Park Meadows Mall”, hey “take us to another waypoint that we set” – “came back to the office.”For the last run, we just drove around freestyle, or without the navigation. What was notable is that the freestyle driving was actually the only ‘Track Log’ that the vehicle recorded. Of the five runs that we were testing, we only got data for the last run. Which is counterintuitive. I was thinking that since the first four runs, the vehicle was monitoring where we were. It was monitoring where it thinks you should go, and telling you hey make a left, make a right, oops you messed up – turn around. The morning of our testing, there was a detour related to construction, so we had to deviate from the suggested path and turn around. So the vehicle was recalculating the suggested route. I thought that all that time, those were going to be the most likely GPS ‘Track Logs’ that we were going to get from. Because the GPS in the vehicle was figuring out where we were at, figuring out where we wanted to go, calculating the ETA, all that stuff – I thought that type of data retention was going to be the Track Log that we got, and it turns out it was the opposite.

Nathan: Interesting. So talk about what case issues should trigger in our minds that we should think about mining this type of data.

Will: The beauty of this thing is that it doesn’t necessarily need that same crash trigger to record data, or you don’t necessarily need a crash event at all. If the traditional event data recorders require a pretty good impact to trigger the system to record data. I think the new standard requires more than five mile an hour delta-v to recognize a nondeployment event. If the vehicle is not exposed to that 5 mph speed change, you might not get traditional EDR data. Supposing you have one of those crash events, you get EDR data and it’s only five or ten seconds back. Suppose you wanted to maybe see if there’s something further beyond that window…

Nathan: Ok, that’s interesting. Well, so how long is this data stored?

Will: We were using volunteer’s vehicles to perform the testing, essentially anyone with the right vehicle that would allow us to hack into their vehicle. From these vehicles, we were finding ‘Track Logs’ that were really old – about a year or so prior. But several of our runs of testing weren’t recorded for whatever reason. Again, I don’t know how the some data is being stored while some is not. It does not appear to be the typical “first in, first out” data retention system.

Nathan: Yeah.

Will: And it could be highly vehicle specific, so I don’t really know. This technology is so new, we still have a lot of work to do with other vehicles.

Nathan: Have you done this yet on a vehicle that has been involved in a crash?

Will: No. Not a crash vehicle. We’re hoping to have an iVe-supported vehicle at the ARC-CSI conference.

Nathan: Are you hoping to mine some data at ARC-CSI live?

Will: It depends on the vehicle. Some of these vehicles after you disassemble the dash and take the board out, take up to twelve hours to download.

Nathan: Wow.

Will: For we did our testing for the paper, the 2015 Ford F-350, it took more than four hours to do the data acquisition. We did one baseline download on a Saturday afternoon before the testing. Then came back and ran all of our testing on Sunday, and did the post-test download on Sunday night.

Nathan: What is Berla’s long term plan with this? Are they wanting to package this like CDR where eventually they would be putting this out to all reconstruction companies would have this capability? Or is going to remain a more specialized area for people who like digging circuit boards out of cars?

Will: I get the feeling that they’re trying to break into the accident reconstruction community, but I think their foothold is in national defense, police, DOD, Homeland Security. So, I think the law enforcement side of this technology is probably going to help this get more established and recognized, before it falls in to the civil realm – for use by the accident reconstruction community looking into crashes. Some of the cases that have already been using this technology is coming from law enforcement. It is these cases that are allowing us to see the potential that this has.

Nathan: Has any of that data been admitted in a trial?

Will: I think that several cases are heading towards trial. That was a topic for discussion at the this year’s EDR Summit down in Houston – how many times has this been used in court?

Nathan: Is there anything else you think needs to be said about this technology at this point – where we’re at with it, how people should be thinking about it, what our clients need to know, whatever…

Will: Well certainly, obviously your first step in using this technology is to determine whether any specific vehicle in question is supported. To do that, it’s a very vehicle specific thing. We would need the VIN of the vehicle so we can check it with the iVe software to see if we’re able to recover the data. For us in the reconstruction community, if you think that it may be helpful in any of your crashes, or in any of your cases you want to look for a bigger time window prior to a crash, it’s worth looking into. And conversely, it doesn’t necessarily have to involve a crash at all. It could be any investigation you’re conducting involving a vehicle.

Nathan: Awesome. Alright Will, thanks for taking the time.

Will: Of course, thank you.

The post Forensic Acquisition of Vehicle Infotainment Systems Data appeared first on .

]]>
KFSRT EP3 – An Expert’s Credentials http://kineticorp.com/kfsrt-ep-3-experts-credentials/ Thu, 12 Jan 2017 21:33:56 +0000 http://kineticorp.com/?p=4275 While “the ability to explain technical information in a non technical way” is considered the most important trait of an expert witness, you shouldn’t be afraid to explain your credentials to a jury. In Ep3 of Kineticorp’s Forensic Science Round Table, Accident Reconstructionist, Nathan Rose, discusses the the importance of… read more →

The post KFSRT EP3 – An Expert’s Credentials appeared first on .

]]>
While “the ability to explain technical information in a non technical way” is considered the most important trait of an expert witness, you shouldn’t be afraid to explain your credentials to a jury. In Ep3 of Kineticorp’s Forensic Science Round Table, Accident Reconstructionist, Nathan Rose, discusses the the importance of an expert witness’ extensive credentials to a jury. Click below to listen.

The post KFSRT EP3 – An Expert’s Credentials appeared first on .

]]>
KFSRT EP2 – 5 Tips for Expert Witnesses http://kineticorp.com/kfsrt-ep2-5-tips-expert-witnesses/ Thu, 12 Jan 2017 21:32:00 +0000 http://kineticorp.com/?p=4266 Communicating with a jury is a unique experience, but one that need not trip up your expert. In Ep2 of Kineticorp’s Forensic Science Round Table, Accident Reconstructionist, Nathan Rose, offers 5 tips for being an effective expert witness. Click below to listen.

The post KFSRT EP2 – 5 Tips for Expert Witnesses appeared first on .

]]>
Communicating with a jury is a unique experience, but one that need not trip up your expert. In Ep2 of Kineticorp’s Forensic Science Round Table, Accident Reconstructionist, Nathan Rose, offers 5 tips for being an effective expert witness. Click below to listen.

The post KFSRT EP2 – 5 Tips for Expert Witnesses appeared first on .

]]>