Inflatable Bumper Balls Case

During a baseball game, an attendee was asked to participate in a promotional event between innings. The event involved two spectators present at the game to run into each other head-on while wearing inflatable body bumper balls around their torsos. Following the event, one of the participants claimed that he sustained a cervical spine (neck) injury and sought to hold the bumper ball manufacturer liable. 

Video analysis

Explico utilized computer-modeling software to construct a 3-D representation of the baseball field using USGS LiDAR data and aerial photography, which was then paired with surveillance video from the day of the incident to obtain the surveillance camera’s characteristics and position in space. The positions of the two attendees inside the bumper balls were determined for each frame and allowed for the calculation of pre- and post-impact velocities for each participant. The results revealed that the initial separation distance between the two participants running into each other was more than twice the recommended separation distance for impact when using the product as intended. Additionally, the video demonstrated the participants running into one another with forward-leaning postures at the time of impact.

Biomechanics analysis

Explico conducted an inspection of an exemplar bumper ball. Given the bumper ball’s inflation level and physical structure, as well as the impact orientation, and the change in velocity depicted in video evidence, the severity of impact for the users of the bumper balls running into one another was determined.

Human Factors analysis

Human Factors was retained to evaluate the manual, the product, and the applicable standards and guidelines of similar products. A systematic approach was used to review the system of communication present between the participants (the end user) and the baseball field staff members, to determine the flow of safety information. Explico’s human factor’s team also assessed the environmental and psychological factors, including crowd encouragement directed at the participants wearing the bumper balls.

Explico determined that the risk of neck injury would have been reduced if the manufacturer’s instructions had been provided to the end user by the staff at the baseball field, and read, and followed by the end user. The safety documents included with the product were sufficient to convey adequate initial separation distances and posture orientations for impact when using the bumper balls. The case resulted in a favorable settlement at mediation.