1

Crash Data Retrieval (CDR) services provided by Accident Specialist (AS): www.accidentspecialist.co.za

We have previously written on keeping up with research and advancements in the field of crash investigation & reconstruction; https://www.accidentspecialist.co.za/wp-content/uploads/2019/03/Field-work-experience-03-2019.pdf

https://www.accidentspecialist.co.za/wp-content/uploads/2020/06/Bosch-CDR-900.1.pdf

Once again, we highlight this with the acquisition of the new Crash Data Retrieval (CDR) 900, this allows us to access what the general public refers to as the vehicles “Black-Box”, and keep moving forward with technology.

Around 2012 Accident Specialist (AS) lead the way locally, purchased and started making use of the Bosch Crash Data Retrieval (CDR) tool. Unfortunately, at that stage it was very early on in the life of the CDR, with the CDR largely unable to access local vehicles1. Almost all vehicles locally were inaccessible, not only by the telemetry on-board not being actively available or locked, however also due to the general nature of the vehicles on the road locally being of a much older overall series of vehicles. Nonetheless, the early efforts and learnings paved the way forward. Today, AS has invested extensively in and now owns and makes use of the latest official and internationally recognised, Crash Data Retrieval (CDR) 900 series https://www.boschdiagnostics.com/cdr/

It is crucial that clients understand that there are definitely limits to the use and effectiveness of the CDR tool (as is the same with all such tools). We are only too happy to present to a client and provide detailed and examples of exactly how things are undertaken and the limitations. In brief, the CDR tool can only access vehicles that have data on board. For our local conditions this is typically vehicles of 2016 and newer. However there is a guiding list of accessible vehicles that is published, and is typically updated annually:

https://www.boschdiagnostics.com/cdr/sites/cdr/files/CDR_v19.4_Vehicle_Coverage_List_R1_0_0.pdf In this regard, AS maintains (Through both our local and upcountry office – both offices equipped with their own CDR) the only online database listing of every vehicle tested. Regardless of being able to obtain data or not, the listing includes the Make, Model, Engine & Chassis number and a host of other factors. This continually updated list provides our clients with a point of reference through our office as to what can and cannot be accessed locally. This is over and above the manufacturers provided listing of vehicle that are accessible. If a vehicle is damaged to the point that the electronics will not come on, then access becomes difficult. Although the various modules in the vehicle can be located and physically removed and downloaded, this is an avenue that needs to be carefully considered for many technical reasons, which we will gladly explain and show clients should this be a consideration. In very brief overview, a vehicle is fitted with many different sensors that effectively allow the collection of information, for example Throttle Position, Brake activation, Seatbelt use and a host of other data. Not all data is the same in the different vehicle brands, this is dependent on the specific brand. It is this data that is effectively stored in a crash and sometimes even without a crash (near crash event triggering) and can be accessed and considered in certain circumstances.

1 Almost exclusively of use for USA / Canadian based vehicles.

AS completing a vehicle CDR download

2

The CDR is not to be confused with a typical workshop fault code, reset or general analysis plug in and diagnostic tools (Launch / Haynes / Snapon / Hella / Autel / Vetronix / Foxwell / Innova / Bluedriver / Maxisys / OtoSys / Autel) that is used by electrician workshops, or as airbag res-set tools or panel beaters. Although such typical workshop tools can be useful in providing normal fault code lists, these are not tools that provide “deeper layer” and “coded” crash data analysis. The CDR is the officially recognised, tried and tested OEM accepted tool (once again, see the link to the vehicle accessible listing) tool. This means that the manufacturers themselves have provided agreement and access to the proprietary information and that the CDR can access and decipher this data. This is a crucial aspect. It is important to note that that the CDR tool has been around since original development by Vetronix and General Motors. Subsequently to the Bosch Crash Data Retrieval Tool around 2000, as we now know it.

This tool is Toyota Motor Corporation’s official internationally approved data extraction tool capable of connecting into a Toyota vehicles electronics to give the most accurate measurement recording undertaken by the Airbag Control unit. Toyota South Africa Motors has made use of this device since August 2016 (Toyota South Africa Motors, Technical Services correspondence, June 2020)

We have no intention of attempting in any way, to re-write all that has already been well established, documented tried & tested in the more than 20 years of development of the CDR tool. For your convenience, what we will briefly provide you is a guided reference overview. This is a reference listing of the absolute relevant and official standards, worldwide court judgements (findings), product testing and comparative research findings and reference articles. These will provide for the necessary & absolute validation and clarity on all issues of the CDR tool. We guide you to these (this is not an exhaustive list, however is certainly the crucial items) so that you have these immediately disclosed and at your fingertips, so that you can be well informed and can consider for yourself, the validity of the CDR2 and importantly not be hood-winked.

1 The CDR meets and is built, complying with various international standards, both for the CDR itself, its components and its interaction with the vehicle. Here in RSA, we largely follow international standards, with the key international and local guiding standards listed for convenience:

a. Republic of South Africa (RSA), National Road Traffic Act (NRTA) – Available online.

https://www.gov.za/documents/national-road-traffic-act

b. South African National Standards (SANS - Homologation of motor vehicle models – SANS1026:2013 Ed.3.2 (41Pages).

c. South African National Standards (SANS) - Speedometer equipment on motor vehicles – SANS

1441:2006 Ed. 2 (9 Pages).

d. SAE – SAE J1733 – Sign Convention for vehicle crash testing (Issued December 1994) (32 Pages).

e. SAE J211-1 (R) Instrumentation for impact test—Part 1 - Electronic instrumentation (march 1995) (21 Pages).

f. SAE J1962 (R) Diagnostic connector (February 1998) (28 Pages).

g. SAE 2001-01-0809 – Published 04/12/2011 - Analysis of Pre-Crash Data Transferred over the Serial Data Bus and Utilized by the SDM-DS Module.

h. ASTM - Standard Practice for - Using Significant Digits in Test Data to Determine Conformance with

Specifications (5 Pages).

i. U.S.D.O.T – Laboratory Test Procedure for Part 563 – Event Data Recorders (43 Pages).

j. U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION NATIONAL HIGHWAY TRAFFIC SAFETY ADMINISTRATION LABORATORY TEST PROCEDURE FOR Part 563, EVENT DATA RECORDERS / TP-563-00 SEPTEMBER 27, 2012 / ENFORCEMENT Office of Vehicle Safety Compliance.

2 Please note, almost all the referenced material is freely available online, however where it is not, every reference document listed is stored by AS electronically and in hard copy, should you wish to consider these, please contact us, we will gladly assist within the realms of Copyright regulations and laws.

3

2 The CDR has been tested in various courts against the Frye standard3, as well as to the Daubert standard4. This provides consideration on the issues of the tool used, the user of the tool, the process of collection, what data and the validity of the data and the analysis of this data. These factors all being well established, known and accepted scientific practice: a. FRYE v. UNITED STATES. / 293 F. 1013 (D.C. Cir 1923) / Case Number NO. 4-01-0237 - IN THE

APPELLATE COURT OF ILLINOIS FOURTH DISTRICT / DEBRA L. BACHMAN Vs GENERAL MOTORS CORPORATION (USA).

b. DAUBERT, v. MERRELL DOW PHARMACEUTICALS, INC. 509 U.S. 579, 113 S.Ct. 2786) (1992) Justice BLACKMUN delivered the opinion of the Court. In this case we are called upon to determine the standard for admitting expert scientific testimony in a federal trial.

c. Certified for publication – In the court of appeal of the state of California fourth appellate district division

two CA Vs Diaz E054229 (Super. Ct.No. RIF149672). d. Certified for publication – In the court of appeal of the state of California fourth appellate district division

two CA Vs GC Xinos H034305 (Santa Clara County Super. Ct.No. CC649614).

e. Certified for publication – In the district court of appeal of the state of Florida fourth district division two FL Vs E Matos Case No. 4D03-2043 (Opinion filed March 30th, 2005) LaBORDE II v. SHELTER MUTUAL INSURANCE CO. Emile David LaBORDE, II, et al. v. SHELTER MUTUAL INSURANCE CO., et al. No. CW 11–00956. - October 27, 2011.

f. COMPLAINT received and sworn to in the Ipswich Division of the District Court Department on February 12, 2003. COMMONWEALTH vs. Michelle M. ZIMMERMANN. No. 06-P-1240.

g. SUPREME COURT OF NEW YORK, NASSAU COUNTY - 2005 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 3217,*;233 N.Y.L.J. 11 - People v. Blake Slade, and Kyle Soukup 0666-03 – Judge - Justice Honorof.

h. In the district court within and for Cherokee County State of Oklahoma Vs Janet Ingram - Case No. CF-2006-403.

i. Case Name: R. v. Hamilton – Between Her Majesty the Queen, and Murray Hamilton, Applicant - [2014] O.J. No. 747 2014 ONSC 447 - Court File No. 575/11 - Ontario Superior Court of Justice Lindsay, Ontario - B.G.A. MacDougall J. - Heard: December 11, 12, 16 and 18, 2013. - Judgment: February 18, 2014.

j. Debra L. Bachman vs General Motors Corporation (USA). k. Berry v. CSX Transportation Inc. l. R v. Dallagher. m. R v. Blanchard.

3 Similar to that of other countries, as is already set out and guided in the many case references provided above,

in the Republic of South Africa we are guided by key Acts under which such on-board electronic data or telemetry is located in the vehicle and the access to and use of this data is guided. These Acts are: a. Promotion Of Access To Information Act, 2 of 2000 (Republic of South Africa):

https://www.justice.gov.za/legislation/acts/2000-002.pdf

3 The Frye standard, Frye test, or general acceptance test is a test used in United States courts to determine the admissibility of scientific evidence. It provides that expert opinion based on a scientific technique is admissible only when the technique is generally accepted as reliable in the relevant scientific community. In Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, 509 U.S. 579 (1993), the United States Supreme Court held that the Federal Rules of Evidence superseded Frye as the standard for admissibility of expert evidence in federal courts.[1] Some states, however, still adhere to the Frye standard. 4 The Daubert standard, is the standard used by a trial judge to assess whether an expert witness’s scientific testimony is based on scientifically valid reasoning that which can properly be applied to the facts at issue - (1) whether the theory or technique in question can be and has been tested; (2) whether it has been subjected to peer review and publication; (3) its known or potential error rate; (4) the existence and maintenance of standards controlling its operation; and (5) whether it has attracted widespread acceptance within a relevant scientific community.

4

b. Regulation of Interception of Communications and Provision of Communication-related information Act, 2002. (RICA) (Republic of South Africa):

https://www.justice.gov.za/legislation/acts/2002-070.pdf

c. Act No. 4 of 2013 / Protection of Personal Information Act (PoPI):

https://www.justice.gov.za/inforeg/docs/InfoRegSA-POPIA-act2013-004.pdf

d. Criminal Procedure Act:

https://www.justice.gov.za/legislation/acts/1977-051.pdf

4 The use of CDR data in convicting / not convicting in criminal cases, or making findings in civil matters, is commented on in the following cases: a. Certified for publication – In the court of appeal of the state of California fourth appellate district division

two CA Vs Diaz E054229 (Super. Ct.No. RIF149672). b. Certified for publication – In the court of appeal of the state of California fourth appellate district division

two CA Vs GC Xinos H034305 (Santa Clara County Super. Ct.No. CC649614).

c. Certified for publication – In the district court of appeal of the state of Florida fourth district division two FL Vs E Matos Case No. 4D03-2043 (Opinion filed March 30th, 2005) LaBORDE II v. SHELTER MUTUAL INSURANCE CO. Emile David LaBORDE, II, et al. v. SHELTER MUTUAL INSURANCE CO., et al. No. CW 11–00956 - October 27, 2011.

d. COMPLAINT received and sworn to in the Ipswich Division of the District Court Department on

February 12, 2003. COMMONWEALTH vs. Michelle M. ZIMMERMANN. No. 06-P-1240.

e. SUPREME COURT OF NEW YORK, NASSAU COUNTY - 2005 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 3217,*;233 N.Y.L.J. 11 - People v. Blake Slade, and Kyle Soukup 0666-03 – Judge - Justice Honorof.

f. In the district court within and for Cherokee County State of Oklahoma Vs Janet Ingram - Case No. CF-2006-403.

g. Case Name: R. v. Hamilton – Between Her Majesty the Queen, and Murray Hamilton, Applicant - [2014] O.J. No. 747 2014 ONSC 447 - Court File No. 575/11 - Ontario Superior Court of Justice Lindsay, Ontario - B.G.A. MacDougall J. - Heard: December 11, 12, 16 and 18, 2013. - Judgment: February 18, 2014.

h. Debra L. Bachman vs General Motors Corporation (USA).

5 Independent and collaborative research on the CDR has been completed. There are many research papers

directly and indirectly reflecting the excellent standard of accuracy and reliability of the CDR, with the following internationally published papers referencing: a. Evaluation of event data recorders in full systems crash tests Peter Niehoff - Rowan University United

States / Hampton C. Gabler - Virginia Tech United / States / John Brophy / Chip Chidester / John Hinch / Carl Ragland National Highway Traffic Safety Administration United States - Paper No: 05-0271.

b. Automobile event data recorder forensics: By: Nathan Singleton, Jeremy Daily and Gavin Manes. c. Evaluation of the Accuracy of Event Data Recorders in Chrysler Vehicles in Frontal Crash Tests / Jean-

Louis Comeau - Transport Canada / Dainius J. Dalmotas / Alan German / D.J. Dalmotas Consulting, Inc.

d. Evidence Collecting Black Box for the Vehicles K R Nithin1, Tracy Austina2 1 PG Scholar, Dept. of

CSE, MSRSAS 2Assistant Professor, Dept. of Computer Engineering, MSRSAS / ISSN: 2319-5967 ISO 9001:2008 Certified International Journal of Engineering Science and Innovative Technology (IJESIT) Volume 3, Issue 3, May 2014.

5

e. Performance of Selected Event Data Recorders / Aloke Prasad Vehicle Research and Test Centre National Highway Traffic Safety Administration US Department of Transportation - September 2001.

6 Countless authoritative articles have been published on the CDR directly relating to on-board data use, some

of which are referenced as follows: a. Collision Safety Institute / Crash Data Retrieval – CDR Analyst Certification Course / An Abbreviated

history of the CDR - Rusty Haight – 19 Pages.

b. Collision publishing – Using system data in crash reconstruction – WR Haight / Collision Safety Institute – 13 Pages.

c. Collision Publishing - ACM Reprogramming – Chuck Veppert – Valley Technical Services – 7 Pages. d. Collision Publishing - Basic Integral Calculus for Crash Reconstruction - Sean Haight / Texas Christian

University College of Engineering / Collision Safety Institute – 6 Pages.

e. Proceedings of the “Mock CDR Admissibility Hearing” conducted January 17, 2012 at the CDR User’s Summit in Houston, TX. – 196 Pages.

f. Are Automotive ‘Black Boxes’ Secure? - Charles Murray, Senior Technical Editor, Electronics & Test

Design News Daily Update 12/21/2012.

g. Danger on the road - How to challenge a black box report – Stephen E Van Gaasbeck / San Antonio Texas – Trial February 2007.

h. Recording Automotive Crash Event Data / Augustus "Chip" Chidester, National Highway Traffic Safety

Administration John Hinch, National Highway Traffic Safety Administration Thomas C. Mercer, General Motors Corporation Keith S. Schultz, General Motors Corporation.

i. Use of Event Data Recorder (EDR) Technology for Highway Crash Data Analysis – NCHRP - Prepared

for: National Cooperative Highway Research Program Submitted by: Hampton C. Gabler Douglas J. Gabauer Heidi L. Newell Rowan University Glassboro, New Jersey Michael E. O’Neill George Mason Law School Arlington, Virginia / December 2004 (211 Pages).

j. High speed, rear end, partial overlap crash test of a large sedan and stationary commercial trailer – C

Proctor-Parker and R Stopforth / Accident Specialist / Stopforth Mechatronics, Robotics and Research Lab, University of KwaZulu-Natal, Durban, South Africa.

7 The specific Licence agreement compliance listed with the product itself is found through the purchase and

registration of the product: a. Licence agreement acceptances CDR Bosch tool - This agreement is Between Robert Bosch LLC 2030

Alameda Padre Serra, Suite 300 Santa Barbara, CA 93103 - Hereinafter called "Licensor" – And You, the CDR Software Subscriber, - Hereinafter called "Licensee".

Yes, there are other technical data collection tools on the market that can be used to collect certain data. However these most certainly have not been around for over 20 years and certainly do not have the manufacturer approval and most importantly have not been challenged and tested. Rather unfortunately, there are service providers that attempt to “pull the wool over a client`s eyes”, suggesting that these products are not only superior, however that they can virtually access any vehicles data, every time and that there is always data available. This is most certainly not the case. Having taken the time to compile the extensive provided references and guiding documents, a client, typically the legal department or managers, can satisfy their need to clarify and validate.

6

AS is also able to undertake Crash Data downloads, from Kia and Hyundai vehicles. This is possible with the use of the Global Information Technology (GIT / VCI) tool – Hyundai and Kia. These tools are necessary for such data downloads on these specific brands5. In similar process, access to all vehicles is dictated by a number of factors, typically newer vehicles, however some new vehicles may not be accessible due to various reasons. A crucial factor to note, is that there is a very clear and definite need to understanding the crash event itself beyond that of the CDR data that may be available and downloaded. Having the data at hand, however not having a true understanding of the analysis of a crash from a proper forensic investigative process of considering all the evidence from the vehicle, road, environmental and human evidence among any other evidential factors, inevitably causes problems down the line. By example, among many other similar errors, we indicate that simply suggesting that an accelerator pedal was at 85% throttle position, from the downloaded data and therefore the vehicle speeding, is extremely dangerous if the speed limit is not known, the condition of the vehicle has not been considered and the type of crash movements are not carefully considered. This is where the use of AS provides you with that edge, our extensive experience links the two (crash data & extensive forensic crash analysis), and will definitely guide you on the crash.

(6j) The lack of recording of certain telemetry also serves as a stark reminder that in the modern age of Crash Data Retrieval information from the vehicles, that the specific identification of scene evidence as a whole, is critically important and that the reliance on telemetry alone to provide answers, should not be the case, but as a support. The identification and collection of evidence should always serve to bolster or validate telemetry evidence.

By further example, having a very clear and careful understanding of the process to follow to legally (Civilly or Criminally) access such information and the appropriate documenting / recording of this will certainly be a requirement that could make or break your case down the line. The issues of vehicle data and beyond that telemetry in general to include tracking reports, is a vast and sometimes complex subject. It is hope that this provides you with some insight and direction to relevant clarity and in particular to assist you as the reader to call on experienced, tried and tested and wholly transparent service providers and equipment. Safe driving.

5 Kia & Hyundai, like one or two other vehicle brands, have opted to use their own data recovery tools.