FBI protocols

[38SPL HV]

Why does shooting a bullet through four layers of clothing into ballistic gel indicates the performance of a bullet for defense?

Shouldn’t there be at least realistic material introduced to the testing to approximate bone and hard tissue in order to adequately test the defensive capabilities of a given bullet?

I’ve seen on YouTube where Federal’s 38 Spl +P 129 gr Hydra Shok performed as intended once a thin harder surface was introduced behind four layers of clothing. Tests with just four layers of demin and gel showed that it did not perform.

 

[deyomatic]

If I had to guess, it's just like an ASTM type of standard. It isn't supposed to mimic anything, but it allows you to compare things fairly. Kind of like 1/4mile times before everyone started using dynomometers instead.

If you haven't already check out Paul Herrel videos on YouTube, and his "meat target." Sounds like it's up your alley!

 

[38SPL HV]

I saw a Paul Herrel video and he even shows that 38 Spl 158 gr RNL std velocity was a sufficient defensive load in a snub nose.

 

[sigp220.45]

The heavy clothing test is just one of the test protocols.

I’ve seen homegrown tests with four layers of denim. That’s not the heavy clothing protocol. The correct one is pictured below.

 

[Hapworth]

OP, there are gaps in your understanding of the protocols. Here's a recent thread where they're discussed; pay particular attention to BB57's enlightening contributions in posts #4 and #30:

Evaluating the .38 Spl+P FBI Load/Gelatin overreliance

http://smith-wessonforum.com/140417400-post4.html

http://smith-wessonforum.com/140418446-post30.html

 

[38SPL HV]

OP, there are gaps in your understanding of the protocols. Here's a recent thread where they're discussed; pay particular attention to BB57's enlightening contributions in posts #4 and #30:

Evaluating the .38 Spl+P FBI Load/Gelatin overreliance

http://smith-wessonforum.com/140417400-post4.html

http://smith-wessonforum.com/140418446-post30.html

Unless I missed something in these articles, no testing included mediums to duplicate bone and hard tissue.

 

[Hapworth]

Unless I missed something in these articles, no testing included mediums to duplicate bone and hard tissue.

Yes, you missed a few things:

1) Those weren't articles, they're links to previous a discussion on this forum, of which there are many on the same subject available through search.

2) They clarify the common "four layers of denim" misunderstanding and explain the actual protocols.

3) They further explain why calibrated gel is a superior choice over attempts to replicate the vagaries of the human body.

 

[Echo40]

FBI/IWBA Testing Protocols are meant to duplicate an absolute worst case scenario in which an armed perpetrator is inside of a vehicle or behind cover, is holding a weapon in such a way that his firearms are blocking his chest, and wearing multiple layers of heavy clothing as one might be in the dead of Winter in order to insure that the ammunition tested will work in virtually any situation.

 

[38SPL HV]

Yes, you missed a few things:

1) Those weren't articles, they're links to previous a discussion on this forum, of which there are many on the same subject available through search.

2) They clarify the common "four layers of denim" misunderstanding and explain the actual protocols.

3) They further explain why calibrated gel is a superior choice over attempts to replicate the vagaries of the human body.

Fair enough, thanks

 

[Nevada Ed]

In one test two experts stated that the Gel was the best testing material since.................
it is the same stuff each time and gives a "Fair" value result to any bullet tested.............
and the results can be logged for later data , if needed.

I guess slabs of ribs can be different, some how ?

 

[Protocall_Design]

No one wants to waste a good slab of ribs on bullet testing. Eating is a much more relevant test of ribs.