Ballistics Gel Best Practices

ImBatman

I'm on a boat!
We talk a lot about the usefulness of gel testing and the roles it fills in selecting a carry or duty round.

What are the go/No-Go criteria for gel testing to be a viable test and not just theater? What are the things that must be done correctly to insure results that are worthwhile?

IE, Calibration, Temperature control, etc.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

DocGKR

Dr.Ballistics
Staff member
Moderator
Obviously quality gel needs to be used, most organizations purchase from Kind & Knox or Vyse. The gel needs to be fabricated and stored properly (lots of info promulgated by LAIR, IWBA, FBI BRF, and JSWB-IPT), then validated prior to use (common BB protocol works). A decent sample size needs to be collected; we typically shoot a minimum of 5 shots for each event and will shoot additional 5 round increments if any significant variation is noted. The results then need to be interpreted correctly; some thoughts on this are here: https://pistol-forum.com/showthread...test-assessment-for-rifle-and-pistol-calibers.

Please let me know any specific questions and I'll try to help.
 

ImBatman

I'm on a boat!
Thanks DOCGKR! The reason for asking is to help get a list of boxes that can be checked to refute nonsensical YT "ballistics tests" to help convert the masses.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

DocGKR

Dr.Ballistics
Staff member
Moderator
Well one of the biggest problems is the use of synthetic gel substitute materials which have not been correlated with living tissue.
 
DocGKR, since I am new to the forum and not familiar with you or your reputation on this forum, would you happen to be the Gary Roberts that wrote the 2008 Report On Small Arms cartridge terminal performance and small arms systems? It was that report among several others that ultimately led me to implement the MURG concept. Two uppers for one lower.

I attached some of the information I am referencing, including companion studies that generally corroborated the findings (including one interview that was unrelated, but provided confirming evidence with the test reports from the various DoD branches.).

I've always wanted to get some perspective on those findings if anything further was ever discovered and if the 6.8 SPC performance was the basis for the 6.8mm projectile requirement in the NGSW project that is still ongoing.

Obviously 5.56 is very entrenched and with the improvements in 5.56 loads, it was my conclusion that they found it resolved some of the biggest issues with the cartridge (inconsistency) even if it did not address all of the issues, while avoiding the huge task of procuring new 6.8 MURG's and then dealing with NATO etc.
 

Attachments

  • Gary Roberts 2008 Report on Small Arms.pdf
    1,018.7 KB · Views: 1
  • David Zhou 19394 Maintaining Overmatch.pdf
    910.4 KB · Views: 1
  • DO WE NEED A NEW SERVICE RIFLE CARTRIDGE (Jim Schatz).pdf
    828.5 KB · Views: 1
  • Hog Hunting - The Best AR-15 Calibers.pdf
    2.8 MB · Views: 1
Top