Article Original Article Studying Fired Bullet Performance in a Unique Environment Matthew Noedel, Neodel Scientific, Puyallup, WA [email protected] Abstract: Many studies have been conducted about the evaluation and reconstruction of fired bullet paths delivered in indoor scenes (1-4). Typically, the shooting environment for such training is achieved by the construction of temporary walls, artificial matrices, or other simulated surfaces so that shots of known origin can be safely delivered and the properties studied while on an active shooting range. During this study an abandoned and vacant structure, the University of Colorado Hospital building, was Received: 05.16.2010 made available for delivering live shots within the office areas. Revised: 07.07.2010 Keywords: trajectory analysis, ricochet Accepted: 07.10.2010 Copyright: © 2010 Matthew Noedel. Copyright for this article is retained by the author with publication rights granted to the Association for Crime Scene Reconstruction. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivatives License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/) which permits unrestricted noncommercial use, distribution, and reproduction, provided the original work is properly cited and not changed in any way. Citation: Noedel, Matthew. “Studying Fired Bullet Performance in a Unique Environment.” Journal of the Association for Crime Scene Reconstruction 16.3 (2010): 27-36. Introduction by each shot. A review of each known will During the 2009 Association for Crime be presented and discussed for this report. Scene Reconstruction (ACSR) annual con- ference, an opportunity to conduct shoot- Materials ing experiments in a controlled indoor set- •A Sig Sauer, .40 S&W caliber semiauto- ting was offered. Test shots were delivered matic pistol inside some available office space at the •A Glock, .40 S&W caliber semiauto- abandoned University of Colorado hospital matic pistol in downtown Denver, CO. Conference at- •Winchester, .40 S&W, 180 grain full tendees were then offered a workshop that metal jacket* (FMJ) flat point ammunition tasked them with documenting evaluating •Speer, .40 S&W, 165 grain jacketed hol- and reconstructing the fired bullet paths. low point (JHP) ammunition •Miscellaneous trajectory rods, tape mea- The area included a carpeted floor (over sures and protractors concrete) with multiple offices each which •A Nikon model D80 digital camera had functioning solid wooden doors. Six separate test shots were delivered in this *Note: Full metal jacket bullets exhibit environment from known positions and an exposed lead base conference attendees were taxed with docu- menting and recording the location, hori- zontal and vertical trajectories represented Journal of the Association for Crime Scene Reconstruction 27 www.acsr.org Methods position to simulate a real scene and to al- After assuring that all areas at and ad- low the examination of the bullet for trace jacent to the shooting paths were vacant, information that may help reconstruct the each of six different shots was delivered as bullet path. For demonstrative purposes, described below. Shots were delivered from two additional shots were delivered through known positions and directed in a path to a reinforced thick glass window located on incorporate multiple intermediate targets. an interior door of the scene and the bul- Horizontal angles were recorded from left lets captured in an appropriately positioned to right (as one reads a book) such that fac- ballistic vest. ing the wall would be read as 90 degrees. Vertical angles were recorded as (+) upward Results or (-) downward where a level path would Test Shot #1 be assigned as zero degrees. After each shot, the fired bullet was located but left in Figure 1: Fired bullet from •Firearm: Sig Sauer .40 S&W caliber semi- test shot 1, the nose of automatic pistol the bullet was smashed inward. •ammunition: Winchester 180 grain FMJ flat point ammunition •Horizontal Firing angle: 108 degrees •Vertical Firing angle: -10 degrees •Bullet PatH: This fired bullet perforated two layers of drywall, crossed a vacant of- fice, perforated two more layers of painted drywall, exited through an open door, rico- cheted off the carpet and perforated two more layers of painted drywall. Test Shot #1 www.acsr.org 28 Volume 16, Issue 3, Summer 2010 Figure 2: Fired bullet from test shot 2. As was antici- pated, the initial impact to a hard surface (the carpeted concrete floor) caused a flat smooth area on the side of the bullet. Also, the hollow point cavity smashed partially closed (and ultimately filled with drywall) thus did not expand as de- signed. The inability of the “non-hydraulic” com- pressed drywall to push the walls of the hollow point outward resulted The shot originated from inside the first in the bullet not “mush- office, through two layers of painted dry- rooming” as designed. wall and across a second adjacent office; through two more layers of painted drywall Figure 1 shows the appearance of the and into a third office exiting out the open fired bullet. The initial horizontal angle office door where the bullet ricocheted off was approximately 108 degrees (reading out of the carpeted floor. The bullet continued from the wall from left to right) and the ini- after the ricochet down the hall and per- tial vertical angle was approximately -10 de- forated two more layers of painted dry- grees (10 degrees downward relative to zero wall into a fourth office where the bullet being straight into the wall). Upon impact ultimately came to rest. The entire distance with the carpet glued over concrete floor, covered by this projectile was approximate- the bullet ricocheted and deflected down ly 45 feet. the hall and into the office. Test Shot #2 Test Shot #2 •Firearm: Sig Sauer .40 S&W caliber semi- automatic pistol •ammunition: Speer 165 grain JHP ammu- nition •Horizontal Firing angle: 110 degrees •Vertical Firing angle: -24 degrees •Bullet PatH: This fired bullet was fired directly toward the carpeted floor, rico- cheted and continued to perforate a layer of painted drywall and impact a secondary layer of drywall where it was lodged into a ballistic vest. This shot was delivered from an open doorway in the hall downward toward the floor. The fired bullet ricocheted from the carpeted floor and perforated an adjacent interior wall into an office. The exit side of the wall to the office was lined with a ballis- tic vest supported by a 60 pound sand bag Journal of the Association for Crime Scene Reconstruction 29 www.acsr.org Test Shot #3 so as to capture the fired bullet against the tion of the ricochet (departure) bullet path. wall. The bullet ricocheted and deflected, Using the mathematical formula based on and continued to perforate the next set of measuring the legs of a right triangle would walls and was ultimately captured by the have provided the more accurate ricochet supported vest. angle. This observation exemplified that one must always consider what is being im- The examiners attempted to reconstruct pacted by the fired bullet and the potential the ricochet angle and found that connect- for inaccurate angles to occur if distortion ing the perforations in the final two wall to the final impact location has occurred. surfaces DID NOT point back to the rico- chet damage into the floor from which it As was anticipated, the initial impact was known to have originated. Because it is to a hard surface (the carpeted concrete impossible for the ricocheted bullet to have floor) caused a flat smooth area on the side dramatically changed its direction in mid- of the bullet. Also, the hollow point cav- flight, the lack of alignment through the ity smashed partially closed (and ultimately defects to the secondary wall surfaces were filled with drywall) thus did not expand as misleading. designed. The inability of the “non-hydrau- lic” compressed drywall to push the walls Upon further consideration and inspec- of the hollow point outward resulted in the tion it was observed that the final impact bullet not “mushrooming” as designed. position of the bullet had “bulged” the dry- wall before allowing perforation. This was Test Shot #3 likely due to the supported nature of the drywall (with a vest and sand bag). Con- •Firearm: Sig Sauer .40 S&W caliber semi- necting the secondary entry through the automatic pistol wall with the bulge and distorted perfora- •ammunition: Speer 165 grain JHP ammu- tion with a rod (into the final surface which nition was supported by a vest and 60 pound sand- •Horizontal Firing angle: 144 degrees bag) resulted in an incorrect reconstruc- www.acsr.org 30 Volume 16, Issue 3, Summer 2010 •Vertical Firing angle: -7 degrees the thickness of the door and then calcu- •Bullet PatH: This fired bullet was fired lating the trajectory would be the process directly into a solid wooden door (the door best suited to determine this angle without was opened approximately 8 inches at the further damaging the door and potentially time of the shot). Upon exiting the bullet changing or influencing the true bullet path. crossed the hall and penetrated a second Also, it should be noted that attempting to solid wooden door (this bullet was not re- determine the caliber of the bullet from the covered). “closed-up” bullet hole would have provid- ed a wrong caliber determination. This shot was delivered from within an office through a solid core wooden door Test Shot #4 that was opened approximately 8 inches. The fired bullet continued across the hall •Firearm: Sig Sauer .40 S&W caliber semi- and into a second solid core wooden door automatic pistol that was closed at the time the shot was •ammunition: Speer 165 grain JHP ammu- delivered. The fired bullet did not exit the nition second door and was not recovered for pur- •Horizontal Firing angle: 90 degrees poses of these experiments.