Factors Contributing to a Trip-and-Fall event during Escalator Descent

Background

While attending a conference at a hotel, a patron proceeded to descend a stationary escalator. The individual subsequently fell at a location outside the field of view of the available surveillance cameras. The injured individual alleged that the stationary escalator presented a hazardous condition, did not comply with applicable standards, and was not adequately barricaded to prevent use.

Process

Video Analysis

Although the surveillance system did not capture the precise moment of the fall, Explico conducted a camera-matching analysis to determine the relative positions and fields of view of the surveillance cameras located at the upper and lower landings of the escalator. This analysis enabled the team to track the individual as they approached and entered the escalator and to observe the latter portion of the fall. The analysis indicated that the individual did not fall while entering or exiting the stationary escalator. Rather, the fall occurred within the escalator, where the steps are uniform in height and geometry.

Human Factors Analysis

Our team was retained to inspect and evaluate the escalator and the surrounding environment relevant to this matter. The applicable safety standard, ASME A17.1-2022 / CSA B44.22, was reviewed, and inspection findings confirmed that the escalator was compliant with the requirements of this standard. In addition, a review of the scientific literature was conducted to evaluate human gait behavior during escalator use and to identify classifications of fall mechanisms associated with escalator usage reported in the literature. This multidisciplinary assessment considered environmental and behavioral factors that may influence stability during escalator descent, including the potential effects of alcohol consumption.

Results

Based on the inspection, standards review, video analysis, and human factors evaluation, Explico concluded that the fall was not attributable to characteristics inherent to the escalator. Further, the applicable standard did not mandate the installation of barricades or additional warnings for a stationary escalator under the conditions present. The case was resolved before experts’ depositions were taken.