Organic gelatin Vs Clear Gel

[Polecat]

Three points or questions I raise:

The FBI criteria were established in the 80’s, the population is somewhere around 30% heavier etc. Therefore should the minimum penetration not be more like 16” minimum to account for larger body habitus?

Second one is, how is there consideration for human skin in the equation? How would that change findings or how is it accounted for?

Thirdly, when I look at my Trauma CT scans, on slow times I measure things and ponder and on the scans one can clearly reach vital structures with less than 12” actually more like 8-9” or so.

Lastly, is there any equivalent to actual bone? Say for example, a 1” walnut board is similar to the average sternum, or skull?

Thanks for any insight and wisdom!

Dave

[octagon]

Three points or questions I raise:

The FBI criteria were established in the 80’s, the population is somewhere around 30% heavier etc. Therefore should the minimum penetration not be more like 16” minimum to account for larger body habitus?

Second one is, how is there consideration for human skin in the equation? How would that change findings or how is it accounted for?

Thirdly, when I look at my Trauma CT scans, on slow times I measure things and ponder and on the scans one can clearly reach vital structures with less than 12” actually more like 8-9” or so.

Lastly, is there any equivalent to actual bone? Say for example, a 1” walnut board is similar to the average sternum, or skull?

Thanks for any insight and wisdom!

Dave

10 ord gel is supposed to be equivalent to human muscle tissue and the tests are not representative of a human body and the various densities and tissues the bullet may penetrate. Lungs are different than liver, different than heart, muscle,filled fluid bladder vs empty etc... The minimum penetration depth of 12" is supposed to represent a lateral shot where the projectile needs to go through arm and then across the chest to reach vital organs as in the 86 Miami FBI incident that started the whole thing.

Today with high speed cameras, better understanding and analogs possible along with a lot of data from shootings to compare to gel results better tests can be had but aren't easy, cheap or pushed for. Maybe after the next big disaster. Since placement is so much more important and so often lacking efforts spent on getting hits and hits in the right place are still woefully lacking in comparison.

[RevolverRob]

Three points or questions I raise:

The FBI criteria were established in the 80’s, the population is somewhere around 30% heavier etc. Therefore should the minimum penetration not be more like 16” minimum to account for larger body habitus?

Second one is, how is there consideration for human skin in the equation? How would that change findings or how is it accounted for?

Thirdly, when I look at my Trauma CT scans, on slow times I measure things and ponder and on the scans one can clearly reach vital structures with less than 12” actually more like 8-9” or so.

Lastly, is there any equivalent to actual bone? Say for example, a 1” walnut board is similar to the average sternum, or skull?

Thanks for any insight and wisdom!

Dave

Bone will have variable density along the length and width of the bone as well as person-to-person. From experimental data I've seen, you can calculate a load range (which corresponds to resistance against breaking/shearing) in certain regions of the bone (for instance, mid-shaft of the humerus). But how you would translate that into some type of testing media I'm not sure.

Maybe @Clusterfrack has some ideas?

Two other issues come to mind:

1) No bone is actually square. Along their length bones vary by width, height, density, concavity and convexity. It would be a challenge to make a non-bone analog.

2) Perhaps more of an issue. Bones have multiple points of attachment and when I've seen them suspended in gel blocks, the ends are free to move about to some degree. The bone-in-gel does not reflect how bones will actually look/react inside a human body. This is why, to some degree, hunting is an important validation of bullet efficacy.

[Clusterfrack]

Maybe @Clusterfrack has some ideas?

Not really… All I can say from my own experience is: some biological problems are complex enough that physical models and numerical simulations have to be iteratively developed with testing against the real thing. Until solid physical principles are developed to predict the system, complexity will always produce “exceptions”. This seems pretty complex to me.

[03RN]

Auto Glass is a good stand in for bone.

There's a lot more bone and muscle in between you and your attacker if they are shooting at you or have another weapon or just their hands in front of their face .

[Shawn Dodson]

What is this fascination with calling it "organic gelatiin" when it's Type 250A gelatin?

[the Schwartz]

What is this fascination with calling it "organic gelatiin" when it's Type 250A gelatin?

I am under the impression that the use of the term 'organic' in these circumstances is intended to differentiate between Type 250-A gelatin (which is derived from hydrolyzed animal tissues, hence it is 'organic') and the clear polymer shit that is being pushed by unscrupulous vendors.

From a different perspective, the carbon-based chemistry of the clear polymer gel could also rightly be called 'organic', but I don't think that most people think of it in those terms.

[the Schwartz]

Bone will have variable density along the length and width of the bone as well as person-to-person. From experimental data I've seen, you can calculate a load range (which corresponds to resistance against breaking/shearing) in certain regions of the bone (for instance, mid-shaft of the humerus). But how you would translate that into some type of testing media I'm not sure.

Maybe @Clusterfrack has some ideas?

Two other issues come to mind:

1) No bone is actually square. Along their length bones vary by width, height, density, concavity and convexity. It would be a challenge to make a non-bone analog.

2) Perhaps more of an issue. Bones have multiple points of attachment and when I've seen them suspended in gel blocks, the ends are free to move about to some degree. The bone-in-gel does not reflect how bones will actually look/react inside a human body. This is why, to some degree, hunting is an important validation of bullet efficacy.

Split Hopkinson Pressure bar test, maybe?

I've seen some (long ago) for different types of bone (cancellous, cortical, etc.).

[5pins]

What is this fascination with calling it "organic gelatiin" when it's Type 250A gelatin?

I wouldn't call it a “fascination” so much as just making a distinction between the two.

[5pins]

Three points or questions I raise:

The FBI criteria were established in the 80’s, the population is somewhere around 30% heavier etc. Therefore should the minimum penetration not be more like 16” minimum to account for larger body habitus?

Second one is, how is there consideration for human skin in the equation? How would that change findings or how is it accounted for?

Thirdly, when I look at my Trauma CT scans, on slow times I measure things and ponder and on the scans one can clearly reach vital structures with less than 12” actually more like 8-9” or so.

Lastly, is there any equivalent to actual bone? Say for example, a 1” walnut board is similar to the average sternum, or skull?

Thanks for any insight and wisdom!

Dave

A study into the viability of Synbone® as a proxy for Sus scrofa (domesticus) ribs for use with 7.62 × 51 mm Full Metal Jacket ammunition in ballistic testing

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34495451/

Forensic reconstructions and ballistic testing requires the use of consistent and repeatable simulants. Synthetic bone has been developed to be mechanically similar to human bone; however, it does not have the same viscoelastic properties. Bone acts as brittle and stiff material and fails instantly under high-energy events such as ballistic impacts. Consequently, bone simulants for use in ballistic testing should show comparable energy deposition to mammalian bones. This study aims to determine if Synbone® flat plates could be a viable proxy for Sus scrofa (domesticus) ribs in ballistic testing with 7.62 × 51 mm Full Metal Jacket ammunition. 5 mm, 6 mm and 12 mm quartered Synbone® plates were embedded into 10% ballistic gelatin and shot using 7.62 mm ammunition. The models were then analysed to compare the Synbone® to a previous Sus Scrofa (domesticus) rib study and focused on energy deposition, the number of fragments within the block, angle of deviation, onset of yaw, the temporary cavity, and the permanent wound channel. No significant difference was seen between the Sus Scrofa (domesticus) and the 5 mm Sybone®. There were significant differences observed between Sus Scrofa (domesticus) ribs and 6 mm Synbone® for the number of fragments, energy deposition and projectile tract diameter, and significant differences seen between Sus scrofa (domesticus) ribs and 12 mm Synbone® for the depth of onset of yaw, energy deposition and projectile tract diameter. This study indicates that the 5 mm Synbone® plate is a suitable proxy for Sus scrofa (domesticus) ribs for use with 7.62 × 51 mm FMJ ammunition in ballistic testing.

Synbone Generic plate 5mm

https://www.synbone.com/product/ifg-...p_currency=CHF