Forensic Electrical & Fire Investigation Collaboration: When Multidisciplinary Expertise Saves the Case

When disaster strikes in the form of a fire, determining the true cause is rarely simple. Fires often leave behind widespread destruction, obscuring the evidence needed to pinpoint what went wrong. In many high-stakes cases, the answer lies at the intersection of two critical disciplines: forensic electrical engineering and fire investigation.

By combining expertise in both fields, investigators can move past speculation and provide courts, insurers, and clients with solid answers supported by science.

The Limits of a Single Discipline

A fire scene can be deceptive. On the surface, burn patterns and heat signatures may suggest a likely ignition source. But without electrical expertise, subtle indicators like melted conductors, arc marks, or tripped breakers may be overlooked—or misinterpreted.

Conversely, electrical engineers may identify damaged circuits or overheated components, but without fire investigation expertise, they may not fully understand how flame spread, ventilation, and material ignition played a role in the fire’s development.

When the stakes involve litigation, insurance coverage, or potential product recalls, relying on just one perspective risks an incomplete or even inaccurate conclusion.

 

Where Collaboration Makes the Difference

 

Origin and Cause Determination
A fire investigator maps out burn patterns, char depth, and heat damage, while the electrical engineer examines the condition of wiring, circuit breakers, and connected appliances. Together, they can establish whether an electrical failure ignited the fire—or whether the electrical damage was a result of the fire, not the cause.

 

Product Liability Cases
In cases involving appliances, consumer electronics, or industrial machinery, joint analysis ensures that defective components (like power supplies or motors) are evaluated not only for electrical flaws but also for how they contributed to ignition and flame spread.

 

Building and Construction Fires
Electrical engineers can identify code violations or installation defects, while fire investigators trace how those defects interacted with combustible materials in walls, ceilings, or insulation.

 

Strengthening Courtroom Testimony
Judges and juries are more persuaded by coordinated testimony. When two experts present findings that align—each from their own discipline—the conclusions carry far more weight than when disciplines work in isolation.

 

Real-World Examples

Warehouse Fire – Charging Station Failure
In one case, a warehouse fire was initially blamed on a forklift battery. The fire investigator documented flame progression consistent with a ground-level ignition near the charging station. The electrical engineer, however, discovered that the circuit breaker feeding the charger was improperly sized and showed evidence of sustained overheating. Their combined analysis revealed that the fire started due to electrical overloading in the charging system—not the forklift battery itself.

 

Residential Fire – Outlet vs. Stove Debate
In another case, a fire investigator traced the origin of a house fire to the kitchen, where both a wall outlet and the stove were heavily damaged. While the fire patterns confirmed that ignition began in this zone, only a forensic electrical engineer could determine whether the outlet wiring failed internally or whether the stove circuitry malfunctioned. Through circuit testing, metallurgical analysis, and inspection of breaker behavior, the engineer established that the outlet was the failure point—not the stove—redirecting liability away from the appliance manufacturer and toward the electrical contractor.

 

Why Multidisciplinary Teams Matter

At Garrett Forensics, we’ve seen time and again that complex fire cases demand a team approach. Electrical engineers bring precision in circuit analysis, while fire investigators provide expertise in fire dynamics and origin determination. Together, they deliver answers that are defensible, credible, and backed by science.

In the courtroom, in settlement negotiations, and in insurance claims, this collaboration can be the difference between speculation and certainty.