SAE 2001 Congress

last updated 01/02/2010

At least two papers from the 2001 SAE Accident Reconstruction session contained serious flaws and again demonstrated problems with the SAE 'peer review' process:

• SAE paper 2001-01-0502:  Stiffness Parameters for Vehicle Collision Analysis, An Update by Gustav Nystrom, Amador Newtonian Engineering, Dublin CA.

The paper was related to our research. There were a tremendous number of errors and fundamental misstatements in the paper. We sent a preliminary reply to the author and SAE Accident reconstruction session chairmen ( Reply in HTML or Reply in PDF). The only reply we received from the author was an offer to meet for lunch. Here was our response.

• SAE paper 2001-01-0505: PC-CRASH and HVE, an Overview of Similarities and Differences by Fay, Robinette, Scott and Fay, Fay Engineering.

The presentation of this paper at SAE 2001 created quite a firestorm. SAE paper 2001-01-0505 was 'peer reviewed' and contained a comparison of PC-CRASH and HVE. The authors, users of HVE for many years, were not familiar with PC-CRASH. They published a paper with severe flaws, errors and misstatements. 

Terry Day, President of Engineering Dynamics (HVE), sent a letter to users on April 11, 2001 disassociating EDC from the paper and authors. It included the statements by Mr. Day that  "I have heard rumors that EDC was in some way behind the paper. Nothing could be further from the truth. Nothing" and "The paper was not good for EDC, it was not good for MacInnis Engineering, it was not good for the author and it was not good for the industry".

It is unfortunate that until fallout from problems with the SAE pseudo 'peer review' process apparently started hitting Terry and EDC in the wallet did they feel compelled to respond. Where was Terry Day in connection with our and many other authors problems with the SAE peer review process during the years he was chairman of the SAE Accident Reconstruction session?! (We never received ANY response from Terry for his irresponsible chairmanship of the SAE Accident Reconstruction session and his refusal to intervene on our behalf when a reviewer (Jim Neptune, a business partner of EDC) made serious errors and misstatements during the pseudo 'peer review' process.

Fall 2002: It has recently been brought to our attention that apparently SAE removed paper 2002-01-0505 from the 2002 edition of the  Accident Reconstruction Technology Collection CD-ROM

Please see

• The SAE 'peer review' process - our write-up on our prior experiences with the SAE peer review process.

We welcome any questions, comments, corrections or requests for further information. We can be reached by e-mail at McHenry@mchenrysoftware.com