What are some of the biggest lessons you’ve learned through forensic engineering?

Brad Forsyth: Our failure analysis methodology starts by identifying the origin. That approach is consistent with NFPA 921, and it helps us evaluate ignition mechanisms properly. I’ve learned that if you’re fighting the evidence, you’re probably on the wrong path.

Barry Newton: That’s the main thing. The evidence will confirm itself, everywhere you look, when you’re on the right track.

Brad Forsyth: You have to maintain an open mind. Don’t jump to conclusions or become tied to your preliminary thoughts. Let the evidence tell you the story. That’s something I really learned from Barry.

Barry Newton: The idea is not to chase a hypothesis. It’s to follow the data. In a good investigation, everything starts to confirm itself.

Can you share some unique examples of the kind of failures you investigate at WHA?

Barry Newton: One example, which led to a national alert on a medical device and a new industry standard, related to a series of oxygen regulator burnouts with serious injuries in the late 1990s and early 2000s.  Because of our background, WHA was contacted to investigate the root causes of over 20 of these incidents that were occurring in the emergency medical community, usually when an EMT was opening the cylinder valve on an oxygen cylinder with a certain type of pressure regulator attached. The incidents were explosive in nature, usually with catastrophic burning of portions of the regulator body.

Because of the WHA investigation, the FDA’s Center for Devices and Radiological Health (CDRH) issued a national alert and asked WHA, NASA-WSTF, and ASTM G04 to help develop a test that would evaluate the fault-tolerance of all oxygen medical regulators being approved for sale in the US. This effort led to a new test standard, ASTM G175, which is still used by industry and government to evaluate the suitability of a medical oxygen regulator design. WHA received awards from the CDRH and from ASTM for this investigation and the standards development.

Another example was the synthesis gas explosions we investigated that were triggered inside high-pressure cylinders during handling, which led to catastrophic rupture of the cylinders and fatality of users. These involved hydrogen and acetylene mixtures—very high-energy failures. We brought two things to the investigation: one, fundamental research on how those explosions can be triggered, and two, direct testing we performed for the US DOT Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA) to reproduce those failures.

Brad Forsyth: That’s exactly what sets WHA’s forensic engineering apart. We don’t just analyze; we recreate. In another case, we built a high-pressure hydrogen refueling station at our remote site to simulate the conditions of a composite pressure vessel rupture that killed an individual. We ran full instrumented tests to evaluate the hazardous conditions and safety in real-world conditions.

Barry Newton: Brad’s background from NASA with high-pressure systems—especially composite overwrapped pressure vessels—has been instrumental in those kinds of investigations.

Brad Forsyth: There’s another incident we investigated involving a nitrous oxide tanker trailer explosion. We performed unique testing with nitrous oxide to generate new decomposition data. The data obtained from this study was the first of its kind, not something you can look up in a textbook or learn from reading someone’s PhD thesis, and it provided answers that allowed us to identify the specific cause of the incident. It required the unique testing capabilities at WHA, where incidents can be reproduced and studied in a safe manner.  Again, it wasn’t just theory. It was first-hand, test-based evaluation.”

Barry Newton: That’s why our opinions hold up in court. They’re rooted in real research and experience, not just textbook knowledge.

Tell us more about that. How does this hands-on experience set you apart in the field?

Barry Newton: With regard to oxygen system fires, a lot of experts can talk about ignition mechanisms like adiabatic compression or contaminant-promoted ignition in oxygen, but they have no direct experience with them. WHA has studied and researched most ignition mechanisms that occur in oxygen systems, have published peer-reviewed papers, and have had leading roles in writing the industry standards associated with them. We understand them at a level that most other experts don’t because they’ve only read about them. WHA conducts the hazardous tests and assists with the standards development that the industry uses to evaluate materials and component compatibility in oxygen, hydrogen, and fuel gas systems.

Brad Forsyth: As engineers, we bring math, science, data, and physics to bear on understanding what happened in an incident. That foundation is what gives our work credibility—not just in the lab, but in the courtroom. WHA has helped shape the standards that guide this work. Our team members have served on key technical committees like ASTM G04, NFPA 53, NFPA 99, and ISO in high-pressure oxygen.  WHA has also contributed to the US Hydrogen Safety Panel and ISO on hydrogen and fuel gas safety.  WHA personnel have and continue to contribute directly to the development of international best practices for hazardous systems. In many cases, our experts aren’t just applying the standards—they’re helping to write them and conduct the tests that support them.

What keeps you coming back for more of this kind of work?

Brad Forsyth: You’re helping people understand what caused major incidents—sometimes tragic ones—and prevent them in the future. It’s both technical and human.

Barry Newton: You also have to be able to communicate it clearly. That’s what attorneys and juries need—solid answers they can understand.

Brad Forsyth: I’ve worked on more than 100 incident investigations. They’ve all been different. But each one reinforces the value of following the rigorous process we’ve developed at WHA. And each one teaches you something new.