DOCSLIB.ORG

Human Effects Assessment of 40Mm Nonlethal Impact Munitions

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Human Effects Assessment of 40Mm Nonlethal Impact Munitions This is a pre-print of an article published in Human Factors and Mechanical Engineering for Defense and Safety (2019) 3:2. The final authenticated version is available online at http://doi.org/10.1007/s41314-019-0017-5. _____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Human Effects Assessment of 40mm Nonlethal Impact Munitions John A. Kapeles1 and Cynthia A. Bir2 1 Director of Engineering, The Safariland Group, Casper, WY 2University of Southern California Keck School of Medicine, Department of Emergency Medicine, Los Angeles, CA Abstract An extensive human effects study was conducted on 40MM nonlethal impact munitions having two different projectile nose configurations: a compliant sponge nose, and a frangible foam nose carrying a powder payload. The study included initial characterization of the rounds using the Blunt Criterion (BC). Injury risk assessment was done using two previously validated surrogates; blunt impact assessment utilized the 3-Rib Ballistic Impact Dummy (3RBID), and penetrating trauma assessment utilized a biomechanical surrogate consisting of ordnance gelatin and a specific combination of layers to simulate skin and underlying soft tissue. Production impact munitions were manufactured to produce a range of energy levels on impact by adjusting the propellant charge in the smokeless propulsion system, resulting in different projectile muzzle velocities. Twenty-three impacts were performed on a biomechanical surrogate at kinetic energy levels in the range of 148 – 257 J to generate Viscous Criterion (VCmax) levels for injury assessment. The production configurations of the sponge and frangible-nose munitions were compared to the acceptable values for blunt trauma (VCmax ≤ 0.8). Thirty-nine impacts were done on a penetration surrogate at kinetic energy levels in the range of 170 – 305 J, and the impact energies corresponding to penetrations were identified and compared to the production configurations for these munitions and to the expected energy density values for a 50% risk of penetration for specific areas of the body. Key words: Nonlethal, kinetic energy munitions, injury risk, viscous criterion 1. Introduction Specialty impact munitions, or kinetic energy munitions, are used in situations dealing with aggressive subjects when a less-than-lethal response is needed. Impact of a low-density projectile with the body inflicts blunt trauma, causing pain compliance in the subject to alter behavior. These munitions can be divided into two types: multiple and single projectiles. Multiple projectile impact munitions are typically used in crowd control situations to alter the behavior of a crowd. The multiple projectile impact munitions have relatively poor accuracy and are typically skip-fired off the ground at a crowd to impact the lower extremities of the body to avoid serious injury to vital organs such as the eyes. Single projectile impact munitions are designed primarily to target a single individual with a relatively low risk of collateral damage. Their accuracy allows them to be fired directly at the body to inflict blunt trauma to specific areas of the body, with the goal of minimizing the risk of serious injury. The response to the impact can include distraction, behavior alteration, or complete incapacitation. Single projectile impact munitions can be useful to disarm aggressive subjects in hostage or suicide situations, or to target and mark specific individuals in a rioting crowd. Single projectile impact munitions are available in various calibers and configurations. One of the larger calibers is the 40MM spin-stabilized impact munitions. These munitions are manufactured with different projectile nose configurations, for the delivery of blunt force as well as irritant or marking payloads. Risk of serious injury can be minimized with accurate shot placement, and by incorporation of compliant or frangible materials into the projectile design that dissipate impact energy that would otherwise be delivered to the body [1]. Despite the overall goal of these munitions being nonlethal, there have still been cases of serious and/or fatal injuries as a result of their deployment [2,3]. Hubbs [2] investigated almost 1,000 deployments of less-lethal kinetic energy rounds. Over 80% of these resulted in injuries. The primary injuries were contusions (51%), however fractures and penetrating injuries were also reported. In a review of case reports and scientific literature between 1972 and 2009, Rezende-Neto summarized nine studies related to thoracic injuries as a result of kinetic energy impact munitions [3]. Lung contusions, hemothorax and pneumothorax were commonly reported, some with a fatal outcome. A more recent case report presented a 43 year old who suffered a myocardial infarction after sustaining a dissection of his left anterior descending coronary area caused by an impact to his chest with a rubber bullet [4]. Haar et al conducted a literature survey on death and injury from kinetic impact projectiles used between 1990 and 2017, examining 26 articles that involved 53 deaths and 1931 people injured by kinetic energy munitions. A large percentage of the injuries and permanent disabilities were from rubber-coated metal bullets, bullets made of metal fragments in a plastic matrix, or bean-bag type rounds that used lead shot encased inside a cloth bag [5]. Smaller-caliber projectiles such as rubber bullets or bean bags are more likely to cause penetrating injury to the body due to the smaller surface area of impact. 40MM projectiles that attenuate the impact energy through compliant or frangible nose materials may have reduced penetration risk when impacting the torso and extremities. The most common effect from these types of munitions is intramuscular bruising, a temporary injury that involves swelling and discoloration to the skin and muscle tissues. Figures 1 and 2 show the visual effects of impact from a sponge-nose projectile in actual use-of-force situations. Figure 1: 40MM Sponge Round Impact to Thigh at 10 Meters. Photo taken 4 hours after impact. Austin Police Department, Austin TX; used by permission. Figure 2: 40MM Sponge Round Impact to Torso at 1 Meter. Photo taken 10 minutes after impact. Dallas Police Department, Dallas, TX; used by permission. There is an increasing need in current tactical and peace-keeping operations for engagement of subjects at greater stand-off distances, which can be addressed with extended range impact munitions that can accurately engage targets at ranges of 70 meters and beyond. Accurate engagement at these distances requires greater projectile velocity and kinetic energy to achieve an optimum flight trajectory and effectiveness at those ranges. Thorough human effects assessments must be done to define minimum engagement distances, and to assess the risk of blunt trauma and projectile penetration across the entire operational range. Models and simple laboratory tests have been developed to characterize the rounds prior to deployment during the design process [6,7]. In addition, in an effort to evaluate the risk of injury prior to deployment, testing methodologies have been developed [8-13]. These methodologies include the assessment of the accuracy of the rounds, the risk of penetration, and the blunt impact effect. 1.1 Characterization of rounds and design parameters Models have been developed to predict the risk of injury due to rigid projectile impacts and they have been used as a guide in the early stages of less-lethal projectile design. One model that has been utilized to evaluate blunt impacts is the Blunt Criterion (BC), which is based on the mass, velocity, and diameter of the projectile, as well as the mass and thickness of the body wall of the target [14] . Bir and Viano validated the BC as a design criterion for use during the development stages of less-lethal kinetic energy munitions by using the cadaver injury data to correlate BC to the probability of injury according to the Abbreviated Injury Scale (AIS). The AIS uses a six-point scale to assess injury level in terms of severity, where AIS 1 is a minor injury, and AIS 6 is currently untreatable. The data analysis predicted that a BC value of 0.37 correlated to a 50% chance of sustaining an injury of AIS 2-3 [7]. Bir and Viano found a linear relationship between the BC and AIS based on the cadaveric injury data, which can be used to develop injury tolerance curves for different energy levels, projectile diameters, and target body types [7]. Other studies by Bir and Eck [15] have shown that the BC had the best predictive ability of the criteria examined for predicting potential injury from blunt ballistic impacts to the abdomen. The data used in this study was collected on cadaver and swine specimens using a 45 gram rigid 37 mm diameter projectile. Analysis of the data indicated that BC values of 0.51 and 1.32 would result in a 50% chance of sustaining an AIS 2-3 liver or bowel injury, respectively. When compliant or energy dissipating projectile nose features are incorporated in the design, the BC calculation may overpredict the potential injury level, however this conservative approach is desirable for a less severe injury outcome. 1.2 Injury assessment Bir et al. characterized the biomechanical response of the body to blunt ballistic impacts using testing on unembalmed cadavers, noting key differences in the occurrence of injury relative to earlier studies involving impacts during motor vehicle accidents, such as the duration of impact and the amount of rib cage compression [9]. Further analysis of this data, which involved impacting the specimens with a 37-mm-diameter noncompressible baton, resulted in development of an injury criteria based on the combination of velocity of compression and amount of compression, correlated to injury ratings using the Abbreviated Injury Scale (AIS). The Viscous Criterion (VC) is an injury criterion that uses both the compression and the rate of compression to relate the injury tolerance of soft tissue to the energy absorption during rapid impact deformation of the body [17].
Load more

Recommended publications
  • STANDARD OPERATING PROCEDURES Revision 10.0
    STANDARD OPERATING PROCEDURES Revision 10.0 Effective: November 10, 2020 Contents GTGC ADMINISTRATIVE ITEMS ............................................................................................................................................... 2 GTGC BOARD OF DIRECTORS: ............................................................................................................................................. 2 GTGC CHIEF RANGE SAFETY OFFICERS: ............................................................................................................................... 2 CLUB PHYSICAL ADDRESS: ................................................................................................................................................... 2 CLUB MAILING ADDRESS: .................................................................................................................................................... 2 CLUB CONTACT PHONE NUMBER ....................................................................................................................................... 2 CLUB EMAIL ADDRESS: ........................................................................................................................................................ 2 CLUB WEB SITE: ................................................................................................................................................................... 2 HOURS OF OPERATION ......................................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Voting from the Rooftops
    VOTING FROM THE ROOFTOPS How the Gun Industry Armed Osama bin Laden, other Foreign and Domestic Terrorists, and Common Criminals with 50 Caliber Sniper Rifles Violence Policy Center The Violence Policy Center is a national non-profit educational organization that conducts research and public education on firearms violence and provides information and analysis to policymakers, journalists, grassroots advocates, and the general public. The Center examines the role of firearms in America, analyzes trends and patterns in firearms violence, and works to develop policies to reduce gun- related death and injury. This study was authored by VPC Senior Policy Analyst Tom Diaz. This study was funded with the support of The David Bohnett Foundation, The Center on Crime, Communities & Culture of the Open Society Institute/Funders’ Collaborative for Gun Violence Prevention, The George Gund Foundation, The Joyce Foundation, and The John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation. Past studies released by the Violence Policy Center include: • Shot Full of Holes: Deconstructing John Ashcroft’s Second Amendment (July 2001) • Hispanics and Firearms Violence (May 2001) • Poisonous Pastime: The Health Risks of Target Ranges and Lead to Children, Families, and the Environment (May 2001) • Where’d They Get Their Guns?—An Analysis of the Firearms Used in High-Profile Shootings, 1963 to 2001 (April 2001) • Every Handgun Is Aimed at You: The Case for Banning Handguns (March 2001) • From Gun Games to Gun Stores: Why the Firearms Industry Wants Their Video Games on
    [Show full text]
  • Offensive Weapons Bill Written Evidence Submitted by Simon Edwards Section 28 Conclusion
    Offensive Weapons Bill Written evidence submitted by Simon Edwards Section 28 Proposal to move rifles that can discharge a shot bullet or other missile with kinetic energy of more than 13,600 joules at the muzzle of the weapon to section 5 of the Firearms Act 1968; this amounts to a prohibition of these firearms. In her summing, up Victoria Atkins stated that in one example she was given it was stated that the rifles are large and heavy and were capable of shooting the distance between London Bridge and Trafalgar Square – some 3500 meters. Victoria also stated that there had been a recent increase in seizures at the UK border of higher power weaponry and ordinance, which were assessed to be destined for the criminal marketplace, and that the criminal marketplace is showing a growing demand for more powerful weaponry. 1) Can a rifle with 13,600 joules of Muzzle Energy shoot 3500 meters? The answer is yes but I believe that Victoria Atkins has been misleading in the way she used this information. a. There is a vast difference between an aimed shot at a target and the distance a bullet will travel. At a recent long-range shooting event where 62 of the world’s best target shooters assembled less than one third of the shooters were able to hit a 1m wide target and 1728 meters within 3 shots. An accurate 3500-meter shot is simply not realistic, outside being one of the world’s best shooters supported by extremely expensive instruments and custom-made ammunition.
    [Show full text]
  • Empirical Evaluation of Spring Powered Air Rifle Storage and Modifications on Forensic Practice and Casework
    Accepted Manuscript Title: Empirical evaluation of spring powered air rifle storage and modifications on forensic practice and casework Authors: Kate J. Greenslade (Conceptualization) (Methodology) (Validation) (Formal analysis) (Investigation) (Resources) (Data curation) (Writing - original draft) (Writing - review and editing), Rachel S. Bolton-King (Conceptualization) (Methodology) (Validation) (Resources) (Data curation) (Writing - original draft) (Writing - review and editing) (Supervision) (Project administration) PII: S0379-0738(18)31020-X DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.forsciint.2018.11.004 Reference: FSI 9541 To appear in: FSI Received date: 18 May 2018 Revised date: 22 October 2018 Accepted date: 6 November 2018 Please cite this article as: { https://doi.org/ This is a PDF file of an unedited manuscript that has been accepted for publication. As a service to our customers we are providing this early version of the manuscript. The manuscript will undergo copyediting, typesetting, and review of the resulting proof before it is published in its final form. Please note that during the production process errors may be discovered which could affect the content, and all legal disclaimers that apply to the journal pertain. Empirical evaluation of spring powered air rifle storage and modifications on forensic practice and casework Kate J. Greensladea1 & Rachel S. Bolton-Kinga* a Department of Criminal Justice & Forensic Science, Staffordshire University, Leek Road, Stoke-on-Trent, Staffordshire, ST4 2DF. [email protected]; r.bolton- [email protected]. * Corresponding author: R142 Science Centre, Department of Criminal Justice & Forensic Science, Staffordshire University, Leek Road, Stoke-on-Trent, Staffordshire, ST4 2DF. [email protected]. +441782294367. Author Contributor Statement Kate Greenslade: Conceptualization, Methodology, Validation, Formal analysis, Investigation, Resources, Data curation, Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing, Visualisation.
    [Show full text]
  • ARD Inspector Training
    Stunning for small plants Meat Inspection Training Days April 2016 Jennifer Woods, M.Sc. VPM - Animal Welfare Most Common Causes of Failed Stuns with Firearms and Captive Bolt Gun Not the appropriate firearm for the species Inaccurate placement of shot Wet or damp ammunition Failure to maintain gun 2 J. Woods Livestock Services Appropriate Training is Critical to Successful Stunning 3 J. Woods Livestock Services Gunshot kills by mass destruction of the brain 1st - shockwaves compress the tissues ahead of the bullet 2nd - laceration and crushing along the path or track of the bullet as it travels through the brain 3rd - formation of permanent and temporary cavities in the brain caused by the track of the bullet. 4 J. Woods Livestock Services The degree of brain damage inflicted by the bullet is dependent upon the firearm, nature of the ammunition and accuracy of the shot. 5 J. Woods Livestock Services Firearm Basics The basic ballistics of a bullet are: Weight or Mass - this is the weight of the grains in the bullet. Muzzle velocity is the speed of the bullet the moment it leaves the muzzle. Muzzle energy is the kinetic energy of a bullet as it is expelled from the muzzle. The energy of the bullet is determined by the formula of half of the mass multiplied by the square of the velocity. KE=½mv² 6 J. Woods Livestock Services Firearm Basics You want the bullet to maintain enough energy to effectively penetrate the skull of the animal, but not so much it passes right through. As the bullet passes through the air, it loses energy.
    [Show full text]
  • Guide on Firearms Licensing Law
    Guide on Firearms Licensing Law April 2016 Contents 1. An overview – frequently asked questions on firearms licensing .......................................... 3 2. Definition and classification of firearms and ammunition ...................................................... 6 3. Prohibited weapons and ammunition .................................................................................. 17 4. Expanding ammunition ........................................................................................................ 27 5. Restrictions on the possession, handling and distribution of firearms and ammunition .... 29 6. Exemptions from the requirement to hold a certificate ....................................................... 36 7. Young persons ..................................................................................................................... 47 8. Antique firearms ................................................................................................................... 53 9. Historic handguns ................................................................................................................ 56 10. Firearm certificate procedure ............................................................................................... 69 11. Shotgun certificate procedure ............................................................................................. 84 12. Assessing suitability ............................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Different Approach to Establish an Armament System Baseline
    Different approach to establish an armament system baseline Mohan Palathingal Yu Lu US Army, RDECOM-ARDEC Picatinny Arsenal, NJ 07806-5000 Overview • Conventional design of new armament systems is not fully integrated • Proposing an integrated approach to provide first order estimate of projectile and gun using optimization methods – Individual models of the projectile and gun are not the primary focus – Emphasis is on the framework for arriving at the baseline system • The hope is to use this approach to: – Help systems developer narrow down the design space – Provide subject matter experts (projectile and gun) with starting point for further exploration of projectile and gun designs 2 Approach • Simple Quasi static model set up in ANSYS with constraints imposed due to practical consideration for the bullet and weapon • Full Bore penetrator (base pushed; no sabots) • Simple tapered pressure vessel to simulate Weapon – Loads on model: • Normalized pressure travel curves from actual Large caliber & Small caliber data (no IB code coupled with the model) • Design Optimization module in ANSYS is used for iterative design 3 Projectile & Gun Parameters Gbor Gtor Gir Pir Pleng Target=25mm Gleng Range=1000m 4 Algorithm Working the problem backwards: 1. Begin with Target thickness and Range requirements (say 25mm at 1000m) 2. Projectile design space: Range=1000m • Establish range of penetrator parameters Target=25mm • Establish length range such that penetration does not exceed 1.2 times the length (practical considerations): • example 0.85L<PL<1.5L • Establish diameter range such that: • Eg. L/D ratios in the range of 5<L/D<15 P/L Lanz Odermatt fits Pir Pleng 1.0 Striking Velocity 5 Algorithm 3.
    [Show full text]
  • Humane Killing of Livestock Using Firearms
    Humane Killing of Livestock using Firearms This is the downloadable PDF version of the online guide. As such, some of the features are missing, including video footage and web links. The online version may be accessed from www.hsa.org.uk Introduction In all livestock production systems, no matter how well they are managed, there will be times when animals have to be humanely destroyed in order to protect their welfare. In most cases, these animals will be casualties which have not responded to treatment, or emergencies (animals with serious physical injuries or in acute, unrelievable pain). The latter may occur: on-farm; in transit; in markets, lairages or collection centres; or as a result of accidents on the public highway, at racecourses, shows or exhibitions. Used properly, firearms provide one of the quickest and most effective methods of humane killing of livestock. This publication has been written for all those, particularly veterinary surgeons, knackermen, slaughtermen, farm staff and police firearms officers, who may be directly or indirectly involved with the killing of large farm animals. It covers the humane destruction of cattle, sheep, pigs, deer, goats and horses, using humane killers, handguns, rifles and shotguns, discharged at close quarters, i.e. within 25 centimetres of the target – the animal’s head. All of these weapons fire free projectiles (single bullets or shot-charges) and their use is intended to kill the animals outright, with no need for further action on the part of the operator. This has definite advantages in certain situations where exsanguination or pithing would be undesirable or inappropriate.
    [Show full text]
  • A Study of Ignition by Rifle Bullets
    A Study of Ignition by Rifle Bullets Mark A. Finney Trevor B. Maynard Sara S. McAllister Ian J. Grob United States Department of Agriculture / Forest Service Rocky Mountain Research Station Research Paper RMRS-RP-104 August 2013 Finney, Mark A.; Maynard, Trevor B.; McAllister, Sara S.; Grob, Ian J. 2013. A study of ignition by rifle bullets. Res. Pap. RMRS-RP-104. Fort Collins, CO: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station. 31 p. Abstract Experiments were conducted to examine the potential for rifle bullets to ignite organic matter after impacting a hard surface. The tests were performed using a variety of common cartridges (7.62x51, 7.62x39, 7.62x54R, and 5.56x45) and bullet materials (steel core, lead core, solid copper, steel jacket, and copper jacket). Bullets were fired at a steel plate that deflected fragments downward into a collection box containing oven-dried peat moss. We found that bullets could reliably cause ignitions, specifically those containing steel components (core or jacket) and those made of solid copper. Lead core-copper jacketed bullets caused one ignition in these tests. Ignitions of peat also occurred with a small set of tests using solid copper bullets and a granite target. Thermal infra-red video and temperature sensitive paints suggested that the temperature of bullet fragments could exceed 800°C. Bullet fragments collected from a water tank were larger for solid copper and steel core/jacketed bullets than for lead core bullets, which also facilitate ignition. Physical processes are reviewed with the conclusion that kinetic energy of bullets is transformed to thermal energy by plastic deformation and fracturing of bullets because of the high-strain rates during impact.
    [Show full text]
  • Is There a Problem with the Lethality of the 5.56 NATO Caliber?
    Is there a problem with the lethality of the 5.56 NATO caliber? Per G. Arvidsson Chairman NATO Weapons & Sensors Working Group Direct: +46-8-782 4181, Mobile: +46-70-682 6412 E-mail: [email protected] No! Our Terms of Reference • We are responsible for all issues related to dismounted soldier's weapon systems. • We have two main missions: – Exchange of information and lessons learned. – Promote technical standardization. • STANAG 4694 “NATO Accessory Rail” was approved by the NAAG in May -09, and has been sent out on a ratification request. Two ways to incapacitate 1. Hit to the central nervous system. – Immediate incapacitation regardless of caliber or type of projectile! 2. Loss of blood pressure by massive bleeding. – Incapacitation can take time! Small Arms Lethality • GBR hosted a two day ”NATO Workshop on Small Arms Lethality” in February -09 at the Defence Academy of the United Kingdom in Shrivenham. • The conclusion was that shot placement is the most important parameter. • This is achieved through good and realistic training. New Swedish pop-up target Sheet metal (w=120mm) Sheet metal Cardboard Original target Modified target Two main problems with current and future soldier systems Weight Power supply 1.5V 1.5V 3V 60kg! AAA AA 123A NATO Rifle Calibers 7.62 x 51 5.56 x 45 NATO NATO STANAG 2310 4172 Cartridge length (mm) 71.0 57.0 Cartridge weight (g) 24.0 12.7 Bullet weight (g) 9.5 4.0 Bullet diameter (mm) 7.82 5.70 Muzzle velocity (m/s) 830 930 Muzzle energy (J) 3270 1730 Core material Lead Steel/Lead Rifling twist 1/12” 1/7” (305 mm) (178 mm) Penetration of 3 mm 800 1300 steel plate at (m) Penetration in RHA at 18mm 12mm 100m and 0° NATO of APHC projectile Compared performance of NATO rounds Development of 5.56mm SS109 round • FNH developed a weapon family in the mid 70’s consisting of the FNC rifle and the Minimi LMG.
    [Show full text]
  • TECHNICAL DATA & USAGE SHEET 5.56Mm
    TDS_01-3125 5_56mm TBR TECHNICAL DATA & USAGE SHEET 5.56mm TBR Identifiers Designation: 5.56mm TBR Origin: United Kingdom/United States P/N: 01-3125 NSN (NATO): TBC Gross Package: Cardboard Carton containing 30 Boxes of 30 rounds (in boxes). 303mm (11.93in) x 184mm (7.24in) x 152mm (5.98in) (L x H x D) Gross Weight 6.5kg (14.3lb), NEQ 0.06kg (0.13lb) Cartridge Components Ballistics Cartridge Case: Aluminium Average Muzzle Energy: Avg 14.4 Joules / 10.6ft/lbs Cartridge Assembly: 6g Average Muzzle Velocity: Avg 259m/sec (850fps) Cartridge Overall Length: 53mm / 2.09 in Accuracy: 25mm (0.98in) at 25m/27yds (mean radius) Front Primer: Boxer Primer Maximum Effective Range for Training: Approximately 75m / 82yds Rear Primer: .22 Blank / Power Load Optimum Effective Range for Training: Approx. 50m / 55yds & closer. Projectile: See “Projectile Components” (Projectile is powered by Surface Danger Zone (SDZ): 324m / 354yds minimum safe distance. primer only). Operational Data Noise Levels: Peak 134dB (Indoors). Operational Temperature Range: -32°C to 49°C (-26°F to 120°F) Projectile Components Compatible Weapon Types: 5.56mm/.223 Sprung Ejection SLR’s. Projectile Mass: 0.43g / 6.6gr Projectile Assembly: An Aluminium Base Cup covered with a Red Storage Plastic Dome. Shelf Life: Minimum six years in original packaging (Following recommended storage conditions). Recommended Storage: Dry environment, max storage temperature 40°C / 104°F Warranty 18 months in original packaging (Following recommended storage conditions). European Patent number: 1228342 additional patents pending. US patent numbers: 6253682, 6371028, 6427600, 6095051, 6378439,6422149, 6415718, 6564719 UTM, Ultimate Training Munitions, and the “Breech” logo design are trademarks belonging to UTM Ltd.
    [Show full text]
  • 7 Firearms and Ballistics
    7 Firearms and Ballistics Rachel Bolton-King1* and Johan Schulze2* 1Department of Forensic and Crime Science, Staffordshire University, Stoke-on-Trent, Staffordshire, UK; 2Veterinary Forensic and Wildlife Services, Germany and Norway 7.1 Crime Scene Evidence: Firearms and Ballistics by Rachel Bolton-King 82 7.1.1 Introduction 82 7.1.2 Firearms 82 7.1.2.1 Types of firearm 83 7.1.2.2 Modern firing mechanisms 84 7.1.3 Ammunition 85 7.1.3.1 Composition 85 7.1.3.2 Live cartridges 86 7.1.3.3 Fired cartridge cases and projectiles 86 7.1.4 Internal ballistics 87 7.1.4.1 Primer 87 7.1.4.2 Propellant 87 7.1.4.3 Projectile 88 7.1.4.4 Weapon 88 7.1.4.5 Production of gunshot residue (GSR) 89 7.1.5 Intermediate ballistics 89 7.1.5.1 Propellant particles and gaseous combustion products 89 7.1.5.2 Projectile 90 7.1.5.3 Muzzle attachments 90 7.1.6 External ballistics 91 7.1.6.1 Muzzle velocity and kinetic energy 91 7.1.6.2 Trajectory 92 7.1.6.3 Range 94 7.1.6.4 Accuracy and precision 94 7.1.7 Terminal ballistics 95 7.1.7 Retrieval of fired ammunition components 95 7.1.8.1 Cartridges and fired cartridge cases 95 *Corresponding authors: [email protected]; [email protected] © CAB International 2016. Practical Veterinary Forensics (ed. D. Bailey) 81 82 R. Bolton-King and J. Schulze 7.1.8.2 Fired projectiles and shotgun wadding 96 7.1.8.3 Gunshot residue (GSR) 96 7.1.9 Conclusion 97 7.2 Wound Ballistics by Johan Schulze 99 7.2.1 Introduction 99 7.2.2 Basics of wound ballistics 99 7.2.3 Some specifics of wound ballistics 102 7.2.3.1 Deformation/fragmentation 102 7.2.3.2 Entrance and exit wound 102 7.2.3.3 Shotgun 104 7.2.3.4 Airgun 105 7.2.4 Essential steps of investigating a shot animal 106 7.2.4.1 Before necropsy 106 7.2.4.2 The practical approach 107 7.2.4.3 Recovery of bullets 112 7.2.5 Conclusion 113 7.1 Crime Scene Evidence: Firearms ammunition and ballistics.
    [Show full text]