Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jan 4, 2026

08:03
Author Spotlight: Developing Cost-Effective and Durable Ultrasound-Guided 3D-Printed Nerve Block Trainers
Published on: February 9, 2024
3.1K
Ballistic gelatine-what we see and what we get
Christian Walter Albert Schyma1
1Institute of Forensic Medicine of the University of Bern, Bühlstr. 20, 3012, Bern, Switzerland. christian.schyma@irm.unibe.ch.
International Journal of Legal Medicine
|November 5, 2019
Summary
This study reveals that while total energy transfer correlates with projectile damage in gelatine, the temporary cavity (TC) and crack measurements do not precisely reflect energy deposition along the bullet path for all bullet types. Findings highlight limitations in using gelatine models for detailed ballistic energy transfer analysis.
Area of Science:
- Forensic Ballistics
- Material Science
- Biomechanical Engineering
Background:
- 10% gelatine is a standard medium for visualizing and estimating projectile energy transfer.
- Previous studies have relied on gelatine models to understand projectile-induced damage.
- The correlation between temporary cavity (TC) dynamics and actual tissue damage remains an area for refinement.
Purpose of the Study:
- To investigate the correlation between temporary cavity (TC) dimensions recorded by high-speed video (HSV) and the resulting crack patterns in gelatine.
- To evaluate the accuracy of 10% gelatine models in representing projectile energy transfer dynamics.
- To compare damage parameters for form-stable (FMJ) and deforming (HP) bullets across different calibres.
Main Methods:
- 36 shots with FMJ and 12 shots with HP bullets (.32 auto, .38 special, 9 mm Luger) into 10% gelatine cubes (12 cm edge length).
- High-speed video (HSV) recording of temporary cavity (TC) formation at 40,000 fps.
- Image analysis of scanned gelatine cross-sections to measure crack lengths, wound profiles, and TC heights along the bullet path.
Main Results:
- FMJ bullets created tubular TCs, consistent with their deceleration, while HP bullets produced pear-like TCs that did not accurately metricize deceleration.
- Destruction profiles (cracks) were convex for both bullet types and did not match bullet deceleration profiles.
- Maximum TC expansion in HSV did not coincide with maximum gelatine destruction (crack length); total energy transfer correlated with summed destruction parameters, but not per-centimeter energy deposition.
Conclusions:
- The 12 cm gelatine reference cube reflects overall energy transfer but does not precisely map energy deposition along the bullet path, especially for deforming projectiles.
- While total energy transfer shows correlation, specific destruction parameters (TC dimensions, crack lengths) have limitations in quantitatively representing ballistic energy transfer dynamics.
- Further research may be needed to refine gelatine models for more accurate ballistic simulations, particularly concerning the nuances of deforming versus non-deforming projectiles.

