How are forest fires and earthquakes similar, and what can experts learn from them about the importance of peer review?

Why are earthquakes and forest fires important to dispute resolution? For that matter, all the problems in the natural environment? (See a list of examples below)

(The natural environment is everywhere beneath our feet, also what we see beyond the built environment – the concrete jungle – and what falls from the sky above)

Forest fires and the like are important because they remind us about the importance of peer review – getting your forensic work checked by another.

Predicting when these natural events will occur relies on empirical science – observations – rather than on theoretical science that is backed up by laboratory and field testing. Determining the cause of failures and accidents in the natural environment also depends on observations.

If peer review is important in theoretical science – and it is as evident in the research papers – then peer review is even more important in empirical science, implicit in forensic investigation.

Our observations are particularly susceptible to direct- and cross-examination in dispute resolution. So, in disputes involving accidents and failures in the natural environment, you’re wise if you get your work peer reviewed before being exposed to examination.

A timely example of sorts would be a forest fire. Predicting if one might occur in an area requires observing and measuring quantities like:

  • Wind
  • Temperature
  • Humidity
  • Forest type
  • Ground cover

Then putting this data in a computer model, cranking the handle and getting the Fire Weather Index about whether or not conditions are ripe for a forest fire. (Ref. 1)

We still need a lightning-strike or a camp fire to ignite the ready aye ready forest. But, the ripeness of the forest is determined by observations – empirical data – and reflected in the Fire Weather Index.

In addition to forest fires – some of those in Alberta are thought to have been deliberately set – examples could also be taken from the forensic investigation of the following. All of which are dependent to some extent on observations, not just theoretical science. And all would benefit from peer review:

  • Sink hole development
  • Foundation settlement/subsidence
  • Slip, trip and fall accidents
  • Motor vehicle accidents
  • Landslides
  • Soil erosion and sedimentation of lakes
  • Coastal erosion, and
  • Flooding

***

I realized the above when I took in a lecture on predicting when and where earthquakes occur. The lecturer was Dr. Steve Kramer a geotechnical earthquake engineer from the U. S. of A. on a cross Canada lecture tour. (Ref. 2)

He explained a model – a complicated equation – that he had developed to predict earthquakes. Empirical observations were fed into the model and the prediction made.

His talk was hard to understand and I’m still working on it. But I recognize – at least so far – that his model relied on empirical science, the kind that is checked by observations not just laboratory and field tests. This is the same for disputes arising from failures and accidents in the natural environment as compared to the built environment.

What’s in this blog for a forensic expert? S/he would do well to understand that if there’s a dispute, and the problem is in the natural environment, there’s an argument for getting their investigation peer reviewed. Their problem shares common elements with forest fires and earthquakes – an empirical, observational approach to a solution.

References

  1. Personal consultation with David Wagener, Stanley, New Brunswick, Canada, a forest fire fighter for 10 years with Parks Canada, retired, June, 2023
  2. Kramer, Steve, PhD, Professor Emeritus, University of Washington, Canadian Geotechnical Society, 2023 Cross Canada lecture tour: Performance-based design for soil liquefaction June, 2023

(Posted by Eric E. Jorden, M.Sc., P.Eng. Consulting Professional Engineer, Forensic Engineer, Geotechnology Ltd., Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada, June 27, 2023. ejorden@eastlink.ca)   

What should I do? Look the other way or raise the alarm?

What should I do about accident and injury-prone defects I see in the built environment? For the most part, tiny defects like the following:

  1. Old stairs down to a sloping sidewalk from the main entrance of an old church. The stairs have been in place for many decades. I’ve been in and out of this church to concerts. We descend the steps and onto the sidewalk at the upslope end where the riser is the proper height and it’s easier to step onto the sloping sidewalk.
  2. New stairs down to a steeply sloping driveway from the front entrance to a house. It’s scary what the homeowners will need to manage; I can’t imagine what it will be like in the winter time. I understand that the owner plans to rent space to students. A mini-commercial property? (It was seeing these stairs that prompted me to post this blog)
  3. A stair riser that changes in height from one end to the other in order to rest on the sloping ground. These stairs are to a landing at the main entrance of a recreation centre. I was told there was an accident there and a person injured. Surprise. Surprise.
  4. A sloping washroom door threshold in a hospital. The slope is very slight but it’s there, 1.0 inch in 5.5 inches, 18.1%. I knew it was there but days after noticing and measuring it I still stumbled a little going into the washroom! (Ref. 1)
  5. A floor that slopes down from the door of an elevator on a palliative care floor in a senior’s retirement residence. It’s slight but it’s there and noticeable, at least to me.
  6. A floor in the patio of a hotel that steps down about 2.0 inches from one area to another. It’s barely noticeable but it’s there, stepping up or stepping down.
  7. Big, tank-track-size potholes in roads; not exactly tiny. But also tiny potholes. You can see cars wobbling after they go through some of these potholes. A friend sued the city about one that damaged his car. I called 911 about another left at a construction site.
  8. Road-side and parking lot curbs that change height a tiny bit. See my blog posted September 2. 2021, an eye opener if you don’t mind me saying. (Ref. 2)
  9. A floor in a private athletic building that changes level in going from one area to another. But, attention is drawn to the change in level with a brightly colored yellow painted threshold. Good. I was impressed by what was done in this building.
  10. A surface that changes in height from the sidewalk to the roadway. Attention is also drawn to the change by brightly colored yellow paint. Good I see this a lot in towns and cities as I’m sure you do.
  11. Tennis and pickle ball courts in quite level terrain but with a slight cross slope to the courts.
  12. A large athletic field constructed on natural soils; Good – except for one corner on deep fill soil; Bad. Foundation and geotechnical engineers learn early to separate the foundations on different soils. Fill soil settles more than natural soil. The pyramid builders in ancient Egypt learned to do this.

I learned long ago if I was walking on a construction site and saw something dangerous like a deep trench in unstable soil and workers in the trench, you draw attention to the risk.

But, what do you do about the “tiny”, accident and injury-prone defects in the built environment noted in the above list? Should I go around knocking on everybody’s door? Does anybody know?

References

  1. More tiny causes of slip, trip and fall accidents. Posted March 15, 2023
  2. My personal slip, trip and fall accident, #1. Posted September 2, 2021
  3. My personal slip, trip and fall accident, #2. Posted February 26, 2023

(Posted by Eric E. Jorden, M.Sc., P.Eng. Consulting Professional Engineer, Forensic Engineer, Geotechnology Ltd., Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada, June 16, 2023. ejorden@eastlink.ca)