Open AccessAvoid The Pitfalls Of The Too-Obvious Defect
Author(s) -
Leslie N. Wilder
Publication year - 1997
Publication title -
journal of the national academy of forensic engineers
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.102
H-Index - 1
eISSN - 2379-3252
pISSN - 2379-3244
DOI - 10.51501/jotnafe.v14i2.549
Subject(s) - accident (philosophy) , ideal (ethics) , risk analysis (engineering) , forensic engineering , order (exchange) , accident investigation , computer science , engineering , epistemology , business , philosophy , finance
The Forensic Engineer Must Often Determine How And Why An Accident Or Injury Occurred. Sometimes This Takes A Great Deal Of Effort When The Evidence Is Unclear Or Conflicting. Unraveling Such Mysteries Can Be Both Stimulating And Challenging. But There Are Times When The Cause Of The Accident Seems Immediately Obvious. All Elements Of The Accident Are Consistent With The Apparently Obvious Cause, And The Sequence Of Events Leading To The Accident Is Clear. It Seems Ideal. Everything Fits, Satisfying The Engineers Need For Order And Understanding. This Situation Poses A Potential Pitfall For The Forensic Engineer, In That Alternative Scenarios May Not Be Looked For, Considered Carefully Enough, Or Shown To Be Incorrect. If This Happens, The Engineer May Later Be Barred From Introducing Evidence Disproving Such Alternatives.