This content is not included in your SAE MOBILUS subscription, or you are not logged in.
Considerations for Applying and Interpreting Monte Carlo Simulation Analyses in Accident Reconstruction
ISSN: 0148-7191, e-ISSN: 2688-3627
Published April 16, 2007 by SAE International in United States
Annotation ability available
In reconstructing any accident, the reconstructionist must properly account for uncertainty in their analysis. One popular method of examining and quantifying the uncertainty within an analysis is the use of Monte Carlo simulation techniques. The methods have been well established and published over the last several years by numerous authors. One of the key factors underlying the Monte Carlo analysis is the assumed probability distribution of the individual factors within the analysis. The literature has examples and recommendations for assuming normal, uniform, or custom distributions for input parameters. However, the literature to date has not examined how the assumption of a distribution affects the resulting probability distribution of the Monte Carlo analysis. This paper attempts to address this issue. Furthermore, with the large number of samples typically considered during a Monte Carlo analysis, the resulting probability distribution tends to be normal and lends itself well to statistical interpretation as to the “most likely” range of the desired parameter. The analysis in this paper was performed with a plug-in to Excel called Crystal Ball®, and the version of Crystal Ball® used for this paper allows the user to selectively filter results which do not agree with physical reality (for example, non-equal force balances within a crush energy analysis). When filtering results, the final probability distribution can be skewed. This paper also examines methods of identifying the “most likely” range from within a skewed probability distribution.
CitationBall, J., Danaher, D., and Ziernicki, R., "Considerations for Applying and Interpreting Monte Carlo Simulation Analyses in Accident Reconstruction," SAE Technical Paper 2007-01-0741, 2007, https://doi.org/10.4271/2007-01-0741.
- Brach, R.M. “Uncertainty in Accident Reconstruction Calculations,” SAE Paper 940722
- Knott, A.W. “Probable Speed Analysis: statistical Modeling of Auto Accidents vs. Deterministic Modeling,” Journal of the National Academy of Forensic Engineers X 2 December 1993
- Tubergen, R.G. “The Technique of Uncertainty Analysis as Applied to the Momentum Equation for Accident Reconstruction,” SAE Paper 950135
- Bartlett, W. Schmidt, B. Wright, W. Masory, O. Navin, F. Brach, R. Stanard, T. Baxter, A. “Evaluating the Uncertainty in Various Measurement Tasks Common to Accident Reconstruction,” SAE Paper 2002-01-0546
- Bartlett, W. Fonda, A. “Evaluating Uncertainty in Accident Reconstruction with Finite Differences,” SAE Paper 2003-01-0489
- Kost, G. Werner, S.M. “Use of Monte Carlo Simulation Techniques in Accident Reconstruction,” SAE Paper 940719
- Wood, D.P. O’Riordain, S. “Monte Carlo Simulation Methods Applied to Accident Reconstruction and Avoidance Analysis,” SAE Paper 940720
- Bartlett, W. “Conducting Monte Carlo Analysis with Spreadsheet Programs,” SAE Paper 2003-01-0487
- Rose, N.A. Fenton, S.J. Hughes, C.M. “Integrating Monte Carlo Simulation, Momentum-Based Impact Modeling, and Restitution Data to Analyze Crash Severity,” SAE Paper 2001-01-3347
- Wach, W. Unarski, J. “Determination of vehicle Velocities and Collision Location by Means of Monte Carlo Simulation Method,” SAE Paper 2006-01-0907
- Moser, A. Steffan, H. Spek, A. Makkinga, W. “Application of the Monte Carlo methods for Stability Analysis Within the Accident Reconstuction Software PC-CRASH,” SAE Paper 2003-01-0488
- Rose, N.A. Fenton, S.J. Beauchamp, G. “Restitution Modeling for Crush Analysis: Theory and Validation,” SAE Paper 2006-01-0908
- Neptune, J.A. Flynn, J.E. “A Method for Determining Accident Specific Crush Stiffness Coefficients,” SAE Paper 940913
- Grimes, W.D. Heusser, R. Hunter, J. Neptune, J.A. “Developing a Crush Profile estimate by Balancing Impact Forces,” SAE Paper 970942
- Pearson, K. “ Contributions to the Mathematical theory of Evolution,” Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London 91 343 358 1895
- D’Agostino, R.B. Belanger, A. D’Agostino, R.B. Jr. “A Suggestion for Using Powerful and Informative Tests of Normality,” The American Statistician 44 4 November 1990
- Davis, C.S. Stephens, M.A. “Approximate Percentage Points using Pearson Curves,” Applied Statistics Royal statistical Society London 1983