NISTIR 8026 Investigations of Near-Edge Ballistic Impacts on Law Enforcement Body Armor Kirk D. Rice, Amanda L. Forster, Michael A. Riley, and Nicholas G. Paulter, Jr. http://dx.doi.org/10.6028/NIST.IR.8026 NISTIR 8026 Investigations of Near-Edge Ballistic Impacts on Law Enforcement Body Armor Kirk D. Rice, Amanda L. Forster, Michael A. Riley, and Nicholas G. Paulter, Jr. Materials Measurement Science Division Material Measurement Laboratory This publication is available free of charge from: http://dx.doi.org/10.6028/NIST.IR.8026 September 2014 U.S. Department of Commerce Penny Pritzker, Secretary National Institute of Standards and Technology Willie May, Acting Under Secretary of Commerce for Standards and Technology, and Acting Director Abstract In 2005 and 2006, two law enforcement officer-involved shootings resulted in in- juries to the officers when bullets were not stopped in the officers’ body armor. In both cases, the bullets struck the officers’ armor quite close to the edge of the ballistic-resistant panel. In each case, the National Institute of Justice (NIJ) and the law enforcement agencies involved had several concerns. Was the armor’s response indicative of a serious problem with the armor? Was the armor perfor- mance degrading significantly during use? Were similar armors being worn by other law enforcement officers providing the expected level of protection? The National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) investigated how each of the armors performed, including examining the shot panels, per- forming ballistic testing, and measuring select material properties of samples of ballistic-resistant material from the armors, in order to provide guidance to NIJ. The research effort concluded that in both cases the bullets struck the body ar- mor too close to an edge for the armor to be able to reliably stop the bullet. The results of ballistic testing on one incident armor and a similar armor indicated that the armors appeared to provide sufficient protection when struck by bullets away from the edge, in the region normally tested during compliance testing. Material property testing found that there were some indications of changes to the ballistic-resistant materials due to use, but no indications of significant degra- dation in the materials. v Investigations of Near-Edge Ballistic Impacts on Law Enforcement Body Armor This page intentionally left blank. vi Acknowledgments Financial support for this research effort was provided by the National Institute of Justice under Interagency Agreement Numbers 2003-IJ-R-029 and 2008-DN-R- 121, by the Community Oriented Policing Services Office, and by NIST. Their support is gratefully acknowledged. The Panama City Beach Police Department and Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives assisted with and provided information related to the Panama City Beach armor investigation. The Tampa Police Department provided extensive information, spare armor, and assistance that made the investigation into the Tampa incident possible. The National Law Enforcement and Corrections Technology Center assisted with contacting law enforcement agencies, provided information on compli- ance test results, and provided chain-of-custody for incident armors that were inspected at NIST. The authors thank all of them for their valuable assistance. vii Investigations of Near-Edge Ballistic Impacts on Law Enforcement Body Armor This page intentionally left blank. viii Disclaimer Certain commercial products, equipment, instruments, or materials are identi- fied in this paper in order to adequately describe the items that were used in the described officer-involved shootings and in the investigative testing described herein. Such identification or the use of brand names in this document does not constitute recommendation or endorsement by the U.S. Department of Com- merce; National Institute of Standards and Technology; or any other agency of the United States Federal Government, nor does it imply that the product is best suited for this or other applications. ix Investigations of Near-Edge Ballistic Impacts on Law Enforcement Body Armor This page intentionally left blank. x Contents 1 Introduction 1 1.1 Background . .1 1.2 Armor Materials . .2 2 Details of the Incidents 5 2.1 Panama City Beach Shooting . .5 2.2 Tampa Shooting . .9 3 Examination of the Armors 15 3.1 Panama City Beach Armor . 15 3.2 Tampa Armor . 22 4 Ballistic Testing 35 4.1 Tampa Armor . 35 5 Measurement of Material Properties 55 5.1 Panama City Beach Armor . 56 5.2 Tampa Armor . 58 6 Summary of Observations and Conclusions 63 6.1 Panama City Beach Shooting . 63 6.2 Tampa Shooting . 64 6.3 Final Conclusions . 64 7 References 67 xi Investigations of Near-Edge Ballistic Impacts on Law Enforcement Body Armor This page intentionally left blank. xii List of Tables 4.1 Test Firearms used to Estimate Incident Bullet Speed. 36 4.2 Summary of P-BFS Test Results. 46 4.3 Summary of Ballistic Limit Test Results. 53 5.1 Tensile Testing Results for the Panama City Beach Incident Armor. 56 5.2 Comparison of Tensile Test Results from Tampa Armor. 58 xiii Investigations of Near-Edge Ballistic Impacts on Law Enforcement Body Armor This page intentionally left blank. xiv List of Figures 1.1 Example of Armor Deformation During Ballistic Impact. .2 2.1 Strike Face of Panama City Beach Armor Ballistic Panel. .6 2.2 Panama City Beach Armor Ballistic Panel Label. .8 2.3 Tampa Armor Ballistic Panel Label. 11 2.4 Bullet of the Type Used in the Tampa Shooting. 11 2.5 Firearm used in the Tampa Shooting. 12 2.6 Front of Tampa Armor with Bullet Entry Hole Indicated. 13 2.7 Body Side of Tampa Armor. 14 3.1 Entry Holes on Upper Left Shoulder of PCB Incident Panel . 16 3.2 Exit Holes on Upper Left Shoulder of PCB Incident Panel. 17 3.3 Sketch of Bullet Entry Locations on PCB Incident Panel. 18 3.4 Damaged Area of PCB Incident Panel with Cover Removed. 19 3.5 Unraveled Material the PCB Incident Panel Right Shoulder. 21 3.6 PCB Incident Panel with Stitching Removed. 22 3.7 PCB Incident Panel with Sample Material Extracted. 23 3.8 Example of Sample Material from PCB Armor. 24 3.9 Body Side of Tampa Incident Panel. 25 3.10 Strike Face of Ballistic Material Showing Bullet Path and Damage. 26 3.11 Body Side of Tampa Ballistic Material at Bullet Impact Location. 27 3.12 Incidence Location on Tampa Ballistic Material (Layer 1 on top). 28 3.13 Incidence Location on Layer 1 of the Tampa Ballistic Material. 29 3.14 Incidence Location on Layer 2 of the Tampa Ballistic Material. 30 3.15 Incidence Location on Layer 3 of the Tampa Ballistic Material. 31 3.16 Incidence Location on Layer 4 of the Tampa Ballistic Material. 32 3.17 Incidence Location on Layer 5 of the Tampa Ballistic Material. 33 3.18 Estimation of Impact Angle from Tampa Officer’s Notebook. 34 4.1 Near-edge Impact Test Armor Mounted on Clay Block. 37 4.2 Ballistic Resistant Material from Near-edge Impact Test Armor. 38 4.3 Shot Location 4 on Near-edge Impact Test Armor. 39 4.4 Tampa Incident Armor, Strike Face, Post Testing. 42 4.5 Tampa Incident Panel, Strike Face, Post Testing. 43 4.6 Tampa Incident Panel, Body Side, Post Testing. 44 4.7 Tampa Spare Armor, Strike Face, Post Testing. 48 4.8 Tampa Spare Panel, Strike Face, Post Testing. 49 4.9 Tampa Spare Panel, Body Side, Post Testing. 50 xv Investigations of Near-Edge Ballistic Impacts on Law Enforcement Body Armor 4.10 Incident Armor Back Panel used for Ballistic Limit Test. 52 4.11 Ballistic Limit Shot Sequence and Test Results. 53 5.1 Stress-Strain Response of Material Samples from PCB Armor. 57 5.2 Confocal Micrographs of Control Armor Fibers. 60 5.3 Confocal Micrographs of Tampa Incident Armor Fibers. 60 5.4 Confocal Micrographs from the Bullet Impact Location. 61 5.5 Difference Spectrum: Tampa Incident Vest minus Control Vest. 62 xvi List of Acronyms ATF Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives ATR attenuated total reflectance BFS backface signature CBC Companhia Brasileira de Cartuchos CPL Certified Products List CTP Compliance Testing Program DMTA dynamic mechanical thermal analysis FBI Federal Bureau of Investigation FMJ full metal jacket FTIR Fourier transform infrared spectroscopy IR Interim Requirements JHP jacketed hollow point JSP jacketed soft point LEOKA Law Enforcement Officers Killed and Assaulted LSCM laser scanning confocal microscope MCT mercury-cadmium-telluride NIJ National Institute of Justice NILECJ National Institute of Law Enforcement and Criminal Justice NIST National Institute of Standards and Technology P-BFS penetration and backface signature PBO poly(p-phenylene benzobisoxazole) PCB Panama City Beach PPTA poly(p-phenylene terephthalamide) xvii Investigations of Near-Edge Ballistic Impacts on Law Enforcement Body Armor SAAMI Sporting Arms and Ammunition Manufacturers’ Institute SPSJ soft point semi-jacketed UHMWPE ultra-high molecular weight polyethylene UTM universal testing machine xviii 1 Introduction In 2005 and 2006, two law enforcement officer-involved shootings resulted in officer injuries—one fatal [1, 2, 3, 4], one minor [5, 6, 7]—when bullets that struck the officers’ body armor were not stopped in the armor. In both cases, the bullets struck the armor close to the edge of the ballistic panel. In each case, the National Institute of Justice (NIJ) and the law enforcement agencies involved had several concerns: Was the armor’s response indicative of a serious problem with the armor? Was the armor performance degrading signif- icantly during use? Were similar armors being worn by other law enforcement officers providing the expected level of protection? For help answering these questions, NIJ requested the assistance of researchers from the National Insti- tute of Standards and Technology (NIST).