Bloodstain Pattern Analysis For Determination of Point of Origin - Nima Behrooz

Bloodstain Pattern Analysis
for Determination of Point of Origin
By
Nima Behrooz
A thesis submitted in partial fulfilment

of the requirements for the degree of
BACHELOR OF APPLIED SCIENCE
Supervisor: Professor Sanjeev Chandra
Department of Mechanical and Industrial Engineering

Abstract
Bloodstain Pattern Analysis for Determination of Point of Origin
Nima Behrooz
Bachelor of Applied Science
Department of Mechanical and Industrial Engineering
University of Toronto
2009
This thesis investigates the accuracy of the method which is used to determine the origin
in bloodstain pattern analysis, namely, Stringing Method. This is accomplished by
generating blood patterns from a point source. The results show that the stringing method
is accurate in determining the origin on the horizontal plane. However, it fails to predict
the height accurately and over-estimates the origin. Thus, the proposed approach is to
apply the string method to as many stains as possible and take the lowest estimation as
the origin. The secondary goal of the project is to study the effect of drag force on the
motion of blood droplets. It is observed that the error due to neglecting the drag force is
significant and ignoring this force causes inaccuracy in analysis. The amount of error
varies from case to case and no pattern is found in the results. The variation is due to
dependence of drag force on droplet diameter and velocity which are different for each
droplet.
ii
Dedication
To my mother and to my father
Acknowledgments
The author would like to thank Professor S. Chandra for his valued guidance throughout
this project. The appreciation is extended to L. Hulse-Smith of the Ontario Centre for
Forensic Sciences for his valuable support. The author would also like to thank Quality
Meat Packers for their donation of blood for the experiments. Financial support for this
project was provided by Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada.
iii
Table of Contents
Abstract ii
Dedication iii
Acknowledgments iii
Table of Contents iv
List of Tables vi
List of Figures viii
Nomenclature ix
1. Introduction 1
1.1 Motivation.................................................................................................. 1
1.2 Objective................................................................................... ................ 2
1.3 Background................................................................................................ 2
1.3.1 Stringing Method............................................................................ 2
1.3.2 Well-Formed Stain......................................................................... 4
1.3.3 Determining the Impact Angle....................................................... 5
1.3.4 Drag Force on Blood Droplets....................................................... 6
1.3.5 Projectile Motion Equations........................................................... 6
2. Methods & Materials 8
2.1 Generation of Bloodstain Patterns............................................................. 8
2.1.1 Experimental Apparatus................................................................. 8
2.1.2 Needle Gauge Sizes........................................................................ 10
2.1.3 High-Speed Camera....................................................................... 10
2.1.4 Pre-testing with Water & Food Coloring Mixture......................... 11
2.1.5 Testing with Pig’s Blood................................................................ 11
2.1.6 Test Procedure to Generate Bloodstain Patterns............................ 11
2.1.7 Determining the Suspended Droplet Diameter.............................. 12
2.2 Analysis of Bloodstain Patterns................................................................. 14
2.2.1 Digitizing the Bloodstain Patterns.................................................. 14
2.2.2 Determining the Impact Angle....................................................... 14
2.2.3 Measuring Droplet Diameter and Initial Velocity from Video...... 15
iv
2.2.4 Estimation of Initial Velocity & Height by Projectile Method...... 16
2.2.5 Drag Force Effect........................................................................... 17
2.2.6 Determining the Suspended Droplet Diameter from Videos......... 17
2.2.7 Procedure to Analyze Bloodstain Patterns..................................... 18
3. Results 19
3.1 List of Experiments.................................................................................... 19
3.2 Point of Convergence................................................................................ 19
3.3 Point of Origin........................................................................................... 21
3.4 Initial Velocity........................................................................................... 22
3.5 Experimental & Analytical Results........................................................... 25
4. Discussion 27
4.1 Point of Convergence................................................................................ 27
4.2 Point of Origin........................................................................................... 28
4.3 Initial Velocity........................................................................................... 31
4.4 Drag Force Effect...................................................................................... 33
4.5 Droplet Diameter....................................................................................... 34
5. Conclusion 35
References 36
Appendices 37
Appendix A..................................................................................................... 38
Appendix B...................................................................................................... 42
Appendix C...................................................................................................... 52
v
List of Tables
1 Table 1-1 – Different Stain Geometries.............................................................................. 5
2 Table 2-1 – Size of the Needles Used in the Experiments ............................................... 10
3 Table 2-2 – Physical Properties of Pig Blood & Human Blood ....................................... 11
4 Table 2-3 – Droplet Diameter of Gauge 12 Needle Using Volume Method.................... 13
5 Table 2-4 – Droplet Diameter of Gauge 12 Needle Using Mass Method ........................ 13
6 Table 2-5 – Droplet Diameter of Gauge 12 Needle Obtained from the Videos ............... 13
7 Table 2-6 – Droplet Diameter of Gauge 17 Needle Using Volume Method.................... 13
8 Table 2-7 – Droplet Diameter of Gauge 17 Needle Using Mass Method ........................ 13
9 Table 2-8 – Droplet Diameter of Gauge 17 Needle Obtained from the Videos ............... 13
10 Table 3-1 – List of Blood Experiments Used for Analysis .............................................. 19
11 Table 3-2 – Error Associated with Determination of POC Using Stringing Method....... 19
12 Table 3-3 – Average Height Determined by Stringing and Projectile Methods .............. 21
13 Table 3-4 – Percentage Error Associated with Different Approaches ............................. 21
14 Table 3-5 – Initial Velocity Measured by Different Approaches..................................... 22
15 Table 3-6 – Relevant Information .................................................................................... 25
16 Table 3-7 – Results of Bloodstain Pattern Analysis ......................................................... 25
17 Table 3-8 – Results Deduced from the Video .................................................................. 26
18 Table 3-9 – Effect of Drag Force...................................................................................... 26
19 Table C1 – Relevant Information on Test 1 ..................................................................... 53
20 Table C2 – Results of the Blood Pattern Analysis of Test 1 ............................................ 53
21 Table C3 – Results Deduced from the Video of Test 1.................................................... 54
22 Table C4 – Effect of Drag Force (Test 1)......................................................................... 54
24 Table C6 – Results of the Blood Pattern Analysis of Test 4 ............................................ 55
25 Table C7 – Results Deduced from the Video of Test 4.................................................... 56
26 Table C8 – Effect of Drag Force (Test 4)......................................................................... 56
28 Table C10 – Results of the Blood Pattern Analysis of Test 5 .......................................... 57
29 Table C11 – Results Deduced from the Video of Test 5.................................................. 58
vi
30 Table C12 – Effect of Drag Force (Test 5)....................................................................... 58
31 Table C13 – Relevant Information on Test 6 ................................................................... 59
35 Table C17 – Relevant Information on Test 7 ................................................................... 61
39 Table C21 – Relevant Information on Test 10 ................................................................. 63
40 Table C22 – Results of the Blood Pattern Analysis of Test 10 ........................................ 63
41 Table C23 – Results Deduced from the Video of Test 10................................................ 64
42 Table C24 – Effect of Drag Force (Test 10)..................................................................... 64
vii
List of Figures
1-1 Stringing Method and Point of Convergence.................................................... 3
1-2 Point of Origin Determined by Stringing Method............................................ 3
1-3 Well-Formed Stain............................................................................................ 4
1-4 Measuring Method of the Length and Width of a Stain................................... 4
2-1 Schematic Diagram of the Experimental Apparatus......................................... 9
2-2 Technique Used to Measure the Length and Width.......................................... 14
2-3 Technique Used to Measure the Velocity......................................................... 15
3-1 The Stringing Method Applied to Test 4.......................................................... 20
3-2 Detachment Process During the First 40ms...................................................... 23
4-1 Error Associated With Determination of Point of Convergence (Gauge 12)... 27
4-2 Error Associated With Determination of Point of Convergence (Gauge 17)... 28
4-3 Error in Determination of Point of Origin (Gauge 12)..................................... 30
4-4 Error in Determination of Point of Origin (Gauge 17)..................................... 30
4-5 Error Associated with Different Methods to Determine the Height................. 31
4-6 Comparison of Initial Velocity (Gauge 12)...................................................... 32
4-7 Comparison of Initial Velocity (Gauge 17)...................................................... 32
4-8 Percent Error due to Neglecting the Drag Force Effect.................................... 34
B1 Droplet Detachment Process of Test 1 & 4...................................................... 43
B2 Droplet Detachment Process of Test 7 & 10.................................................... 46
B3 Droplet Detachment Process of Test 15 & 18.................................................. 49
viii
Nomenclature
 Impact Angle
L Length or Major Axis of a Stain
W Width or Minor Axis of a Stain
FDrag Drag Force
CD Coefficient of Drag
ρ Density
v Velocity
A Frontal Area
Re Reynolds Number
D Diameter
μ Viscosity
y Height
y0 Initial Height
x Horizontal Displacement
x0 Initial Horizontal Displacement
v0 Initial Velocity
v0 y Initial Vertical Velocity
v0 x Initial Horizontal Velocity
0 Shooting Angle
t Time
ix
g Gravitational Acceleration
vy Vertical Velocity
vx Horizontal Velocity
a Acceleration
Do Suspended Droplet Diameter
Q Droplet Volume
N Number of Droplets to Accumulate 2 ml
m Total Mass
d minor Suspended Droplet shorter Diameter
d major Suspended Droplet longer Diameter
BPA Blood Pattern Analysis
POC Point of Convergence
PO Point of Origin
x
1. Introduction
1.1 Motivation
Bloodstain patterns are among the most important evidence found at a crime scene
and a lot of information can be obtained from them. Forensic scientists analyze blood
stains by serological (such as studying DNA or determining the blood type),
electrophoretic and immunological methods (such as its identification, species
determination). However, a bloodstain pattern analysis (BPA) can have an equivalent
value and sometimes it can be more important than the methods listed above [1].
Bloodstain patterns can provide valuable information about the events that occurred
during a crime and the actions that resulted in their creations. Blood Pattern Analysis
enables the forensic scientists to reconstruct these events and evaluate the statements of
crime participants and witnesses [2].
The importance of blood patterns was recognized over 100 years ago by Piotrowski
[3]. The first recognition of bloodstain patterns as evidence in a trial goes back to 1955 in
Ohio. Additionally, the first influential person in the field of bloodstain pattern analysis
was MacDonell [3]. He studied bloodstain patterns by performing experiments and
attempting to re-create patterns similar to those found at crime scenes. Also, he was able
to provide a formula to calculate the impact angle of a blood droplet from analysis of its
corresponding stain.
Despite the importance of bloodstain patterns, a lack of understanding can be found in
literature reviews and it seems that more research needs to be conducted in this field. One
of the main tasks in a blood pattern analysis is the determination of the point of origin or
1
height. The current technique, called “Stringing Method”, to determine the origin of a
blood pattern is not very accurate and it only results in a rough estimate. The flaws of this
technique will be explained in detail in the subsequent sections.
1.2 Objective
The objective of this project is to investigate the accuracy of the stringing method and
if possible provide a more accurate technique to determine the point of origin of a
bloodstain pattern. The secondary goal of this project is to investigate the effect of drag
forces on the motion of blood droplets. To accomplish these objectives, an experimental
apparatus is required to be designed. This apparatus must be capable of generating and
shooting a single droplet at different velocities. Using this test fixture, blood patterns are
generated and analyzed in order to achieve the project’s goals. Thus, this thesis project
consists of two main tasks which are as follows:
1) Design and fabrication of a blood pattern generator
2) Analysis of bloodstain patterns to complete the objectives
1.3 Background
1.3.1 Stringing Method
As Akin explains [4], the method in blood pattern analysis to find the point of origin
is based on finding the point of convergence (POC). When blood is dispersed from a
wound, some stains will have tadpole shapes and they tend to fan out around a common
point. If imaginary lines are drawn along the length of several stains, they will cross one
another at a common point, called the point of convergence. This point is taken as the
point where the victim was standing during the crime, figure 1-1 [4] on the next page.
2
Figure 1-1 – Stringing Method and Point of Convergence [4]
The point of origin is assumed to be above the point of convergence on the
perpendicular axis. The value of point of origin is calculated by measuring the distance
between a blood stain to the POC and multiplying this value by the tangent of the impact
angle, θ, figure 1-2 [4]. This technique uses trigonometry laws of a right-angle triangle to
find the origin but the actual path, taken by the blood droplets, is a parabolic trajectory.
Hence, the stringing method to determine the height results in an over-estimation.
Figure 1-2 – Point of Origin Determined by Stringing Method
3
1.3.2 Well-Formed Stain
The equations provided for the bloodstain analysis are applicable to “well-formed”
stains only. A stain is considered to be well-formed if it yields two identical halves when
it is divided along its major or minor axis, figure 1-3. The major axis (length or L) and
minor axis (width or W) are defined in this figure and the measurements of these axes
during the analysis are based on this definition [5].
Figure 1-3 – Well-Formed Stain [5]
When measuring the length and width of a stain, one must assume the shape of an
ellipse which covers the stain. All spines, tails or satellite spatters must be excluded from
the measurements, figure 1-4 [5].
Figure 1-4 – Measuring Method of the Length and Width of a Stain [5]
4
1.3.3 Determining the Impact Angle
If a stain can be considered to be well-formed, it is possible to calculate the impact
angle, θ, of that stain from its major and minor axes (the impact angle is defined as the
angle between the droplet’s velocity and the incident surface). The relation between the
axes and impact angle was identified by Balthazard [5] for the first time; thus, the credit
for the equation of impact angle is given to him. McDonnell [5] developed this concept
more by applying trigonometric functions and he formulated the following equation, also
known as Balthazard formula:
W
sin   (1)
L
Where θ is the impact angle, W is the width and L is the length of a stain. Additionally,
three types of stains can be produced based on the impact angle. King [6] was able to find
the range of angles over which each type is deduced, Table 1-1.
1Table 1-1 – Different Stain Geometries [6]
5
1.3.4 Drag Force on Blood Droplets
Any moving object which is immersed in a fluid experiences some forces from the
fluid flow. The force along the motion’s path of the body is called Drag and it acts in
opposite direction of the motion. In the case of blood droplets, air exerts a drag force on
the droplets which results in decreasing the speed. The value of drag force can be
calculated using the following equation:
1 
FDrag  C D  V 2 A  (2)
2 
where ρ is the fluid density, V is the flow velocity and A is the frontal area. CD is the
coefficient of drag which is a function of Reynolds number and it depends on the shape
of the object. The Reynolds number for a sphere is defined as:
VD
Re  (3)

where ρ is the fluid density, V is the flow velocity, D is the diameter and μ is the
viscosity of the fluid [7].
1.3.5 Projectile Motion Equations
As it was previously stated, the blood droplets undergo a projectile motion. The
general equations for projectile motion that are used in the analysis are as follows:
Vertical Motion Equations:
1
y t    gt 2  voy t  y o (4)
2
v y t    gt  voy (5)
a y t    g (6)
voy  vo sin  o (7)
6
Horizontal Motion Equations:
xt   vx t  xo (8)
v x t   vox  vo cos  o (9)
a x t   0 (10)
Total Space Motion Equations:
v  vx2  v y2 (11)
vy
tan   (12)
vx
7
2. Methods & Materials
2.1 Generation of Bloodstain Patterns
2.1.1 Experimental Apparatus
The apparatus consisted of a nozzle (1/8” stainless steel tubing) that was connected to
a gas tank, filled with compressed air. The gas tank was equipped with a pressure
regulator which provided the desired pressure inside the tube. Since the pressure
regulator was not very accurate, a pressure gauge was added to the fixture to measure the
pressure. Also, a solenoid valve was placed between the tank and the nozzle to release the
air in the tube. This valve was controlled by a digital pulse generator that could open it
for any desired interval of time. The nozzle was connected to the solenoid valve and the
solenoid valve was connected to the pressure gauge using 1/4” stainless steel tubes. The
pressure gauge was connected to the pressure regulator using a polymer tube (1/2”
polyethylene tubing). The apparatus was mounted on a base support to avoid any possible
movement and consequent errors. The base prevented the movement of the test fixture in
the horizontal plane but it allowed vertical adjustments. This base was made by
aluminium frames and it was fixed in its location by placing heavy iron weights on it.
Additionally, a syringe was used in the test fixture to generate a single droplet. The
droplet was formed at the tip of the syringe’s needle by infusing small amount of liquid
into the needle. This droplet stayed attached to the tip as long as the surface tension
forces overcame its weight. The syringe was placed on a syringe pump which could
infuse liquid into the needle with different flow rates. This allowed to control the rate at
which the droplet size increases at the tip of the needle. Moreover, the needle was
8
connected to the syringe using a polymer tube (1/4” clear plastic PVC tubing) and it was
held vertically in front of the nozzle by a clamp and a support. Having a suspended
droplet in front of the nozzle, it could be shot at different velocities by blowing air at it.
This resulted in scattering of the suspended droplet into smaller droplets. These smaller
droplets underwent a projectile motion and produced a stain pattern some distance away
from the nozzle. The target surface used in the experiments was printing paper. A
schematic diagram of the apparatus is illustrated below in figure 2-1.
Figure 2-1 – Schematic Diagram of the Experimental Apparatus
Finally, a high-speed camera was used to record what happens to the droplet during
its detachment from the needle. The camera was connected to the same pulse generator as
the solenoid valve in order to trigger the recording by the camera and the opening of
solenoid valve at the same time. Use of this camera provided valuable information such
as initial diameter, velocity and shooting angle of the suspended droplets. It must be
mentioned that the actual location of the camera was different from what is shown in
9
figure 2-1. In the actual setup, the camera recorded from the side view which would be
into the page in this diagram.
2.1.2 Needle Gauge Sizes
The experiments were conducted using stainless steel needles with two different
sizes. The nominal diameters of these two needles are presented in table 2-1.
2 Table 2-1 – Size of the Needles Used in the Experiments

Nominal Outer Nominal Inner
Gauge size
Diameter Diameter
12 2.769 mm 0.1090 in 2.159 mm 0.0850 in
17 1.473 mm 0.0580 in 1.067 mm 0.0420 in
2.1.3 High-Speed Camera
The high-speed camera, used during the experiments, was a Photron FASTCAM-
Ultima 1024 model. This camera was run with Photron FASTCAM Viewer which was
installed on a laptop.
During the experiments, the camera was placed such that it records the detachment
process from the side view. There was no specific instruction to set up the camera for
obtaining the best quality video and the setup was on a trial and error basis. Obtaining a
good quality video using this camera depended on the distances between the camera and
the droplet, and the camera and the light source. The camera and the light source were
placed on the opposite sides of the droplet such that the light source was faced directly
toward the lens of the camera. The lighting had to come from a diffuse source; hence, a
diffuser was placed in front of the light source. The camera and the light source were
placed about 0.5m and 1.5m away from the droplet respectively. The camera was run at
1024  512 resolution and the shutter rate was set at 1000 fps (frame per second).
10
2.1.4 Pre-testing with Water & Food Coloring Mixture
The apparatus was first tested using 1:1 mixture of water and food coloring. The pre-
testing of fixture was performed to detect possible equipment failures and test procedure
errors.
2.1.5 Testing with Pig’s Blood
The blood experiments were conducted using pig’s blood which was attained from
Quality Meat Packers, located in Toronto, Ontario. Fresh blood was taken from
slaughtered pigs and poured in test-tubes. The test tubes contained EDTA anti-coagulant
in order to avoid clogging and decomposing of the fresh blood samples.
Pig’s blood has similar physical properties to human blood and it can be used as a
good replacement for research purposes. The physical properties of these two types of
blood are presented in table 2-2.
3 Table 2-2 – Physical Properties of Pig Blood & Human Blood [8]
Human Blood Pig Blood Distilled Water
RBC Volume % 40.0-45.0 38.9-46.3 –
Viscosity (  10 Kg/ms)
-3
3.8-5.1 3.4-6.1 1.0
Surface Tension (  10 N/m)-2
5.1-5.7 5.3-5.8 7.2
3
Density (Kg/m ) 1052-1063 1062 1000
2.1.6 Test Procedure to Generate Bloodstain Patterns
Prior to conducting the blood experiments, the syringe was filled with fresh blood and
it was placed on the syringe pump. The syringe pump was set such that fluid infusion into
the needle and droplet size increase were not too fast. This avoided uncontrollable
detachment of the droplet due to force of gravity. In addition, the pulse generator was set
to open the solenoid valve for 0.1ms in order to allow complete detachment of the droplet
11
from the needle. Then, the following steps were taken repeatedly to generate bloodstain
patterns:
1) Connect the proper size needle to the syringe
2) Set the pressure in the tube to the desired pressure
3) Place 4 pages of paper in front of the apparatus
4) Clean the tip of the needle
5) Start the syringe pump to form a droplet at the tip of the needle
6) Check to ensure the droplet is in front of the nozzle
7) Generate a pulse to open the solenoid valve and shoot the droplet
8) Repeat steps 1 to 7 as necessary
2.1.7 Determining the Suspended Droplet Diameter
Two different approaches were taken to determine the average size of the droplets,
suspended from the needle. In the first method, the number of droplets to accumulate 2ml
of blood was counted. Then, the average droplet diameter, Do , was calculated using the
following equation:
3Q
Do  2  3 (13)
4N
where Q is the volume and N is the number of droplets.
In the second approach, a specific number of droplets were accumulated in a
container and the mass was measured. Then, the droplet diameter was calculated by the
following equation:
3m
Do  2  3 (14)
4N   Blood
where m is the total mass and N is the number of droplets.
12
The results of these experiments are presented below. The diameters measured from
the videos are also shown here for the purpose of comparison. The method to measure the
droplet diameters from the videos are explained in subsequent sections (for sample
calculations refer to Appendix A).
4 Table 2-3 – Droplet Diameter of Gauge 12 Needle Using Volume Method

Trial 1 Trial 2 Trial 3
# of droplets to accumulate 2 ml 45 44 45
Droplet Diameter (mm) 4.40 4.43 4.40
Average (mm) 4.41
5 Table 2-4 – Droplet Diameter of Gauge 12 Needle Using Mass Method

Mass of 45 droplets in (g) 1.93 1.60 2.12
Average (mm) 4.22
6 Table 2-5 – Droplet Diameter of Gauge 12 Needle Obtained from the Videos
Test # Pressure [KPa] dminor (mm) dmajor (mm) diameter (mm)
1 20 3.20 3.53 3.42
4 40 3.38 4.65 4.18
5 40 3.06 4.11 3.73
6 40 3.24 4.77 4.19
7 60 3.21 3.95 3.69
10 80 3.34 4.83 4.27
Average (mm) 3.91
7 Table 2-6 – Droplet Diameter of Gauge 17 Needle Using Volume Method

# of droplets to accumulate 2 ml 76 78 80
Average (mm) 3.66
8 Table 2-7 – Droplet Diameter of Gauge 17 Needle Using Mass Method

Mass of 80 droplets in (g) 1.96 2.17 2.26
Average (mm) 3.63
9 Table 2-8 – Droplet Diameter of Gauge 17 Needle Obtained from the Videos
Test # Pressure [KPa] dminor (mm) dmajor (mm) diameter (mm)
15 20 2.65 3.24 3.03
18 40 2.87 3.77 3.44
21 60 2.59 3.30 3.04
24 80 2.79 3.48 3.23
Average (mm) 3.19
13
2.2 Analysis of Bloodstain Patterns
2.2.1 Digitizing the Bloodstain Patterns
Once the bloodstain patterns were generated during the experiments, they were
allowed to dry. The results were photocopied and the photocopies were scanned into the
computer for further analysis. The digitized results were analyzed using ImageJ which is
an image processing and analyzing software. ImageJ is a free program which can be
downloaded for free at http://rsb.info.nih.gov/ij/index.html.
2.2.2 Determining the Impact Angle
The impact angle of each stain was calculated by measuring its length and width, and
applying equation 1. ImageJ was used to measure these two values and the scale was set
in the program based on a known distance, scanned with each image. ImageJ has the
option of placing an ellipse on a picture; however, the ellipse can only be vertical or
horizontal. Thus, each stain, in the scanned pictures, was rotated so it was in vertical
direction. Then, according to the definition of a well-formed stain, an ellipse was cut out
of the stain and the length and width of this ellipse were measured, figure 2-2.
Figure 2-2 – Technique Used to Measure the Length and Width
14
Figure 2-2 shows the actual stain, the ellipse which was cut out of the stain and the
major and minor axes. This figure shows the measurement of the stain 1 in test 4 which
was run by needle gauge 12 and pressure 40 KPa.
2.2.3 Measuring Droplet Diameter & Initial Velocity from Video
The diameter and initial velocity of some droplets were deduced from the videos
using ImageJ (the scale in the video was set using the outer diameter of the needles). In
the case that a droplet did not have a circular shape in the video, the diameter was taken
as the diameter of a circle that covers the same area. Moreover, the initial velocity of a
droplet was calculated by measuring the traveled distance between two different frames,
figure 2-3.
Figure 2-3 – Technique Used to Measure the Velocity

t = 15 ms at frame 25 t = 25 ms at frame 35
Figure 2-3 shows the velocity measurement of droplet 10 in test 4 (needle gauge 12
and pressure 40 KPa). In this figure, the distance traveled by this specific droplet between
frames 25 and 35 was measured using ImageJ. The time interval between each two
consecutive frame was 1 ms; thus, in this case the traveling time was 10 ms. Knowing the
traveled distance by this droplet during a known time interval, its initial velocity was
calculated. This process was repeated to measure the initial velocity for all the droplets.
15
2.2.4 Estimation of Initial Velocity & Height by Projectile Method
As part of the analysis, it was assumed that the shooing angle of the stains was known
and the projectile motion equations were applied to determine the initial velocity and
height. Shooting angle was taken as zero in this case,  o  0 , since the nozzle was placed
horizontally and this assumption was validated from the videos. Then, the initial velocity
and height of each stain were calculated using the equations 18 and 19 which were
derived from the projectile motion equations. These equations and the derivation are
presented below:
Equations 5, 9 and 12 yield,
v y t    gt  v oy 

v x t   v ox  v o cos  o 
vy   gt tan v o cos  o
tan     tan   t  (15)
vx  v o cos  o g
x 0  0, y 0  0 

 o  0  v oy  0 
from equation 8, it is known,
xt   v x t  xo  xt   vo cos  o t (16)
Substituting 15 into 16:
tan  cos 2  o v02  x(t ) g

xt   vo cos  o t   v0  (17)
g tan  cos 2  o
since  o  0 , it yields:
xg tan vo
vo  (18) & t (19)
tan  g
in the equation 18, x was taken as the distance from each stain to POC. The traveling
time, t, was calculated using the equation 19 and it was substituted in the equation 4 to
16
find the initial height. To simplify the calculations, the negative signs were ignored and
the directions and signs were determined by inspections.
2.2.5 Drag Force Effect
One of the thesis objectives was to study the effect of drag force on blood droplets.
As explained, the drag force acts as an opposing force which causes a negative
acceleration in the motion of droplets. The effect of drag in the horizontal direction was
studied and two different cases were considered for the purpose of analysis. In the first
case, the effect of negative acceleration due to drag force was taken into account. In the
second case, the drag force was neglected from the calculations and results of these two
cases were compared. Two assumptions were made for the study; the first assumption
was that the shooting angle was zero. The second assumption was that the traveling time
for both cases was equal to the theoretical value which is 0.1324s (refer to Appendix A
for the calculation of this value). It was observed that the Reynolds number was in the
range of 150 for all the droplets; thus, the same drag coefficient was used in all cases.
When Re  150 , coefficient of drag for a sphere equals 0.9 (this value was taken from
figure 7.16 on page 482 in [7]).
2.2.6 Determining the Suspended Droplet Diameter from Videos
To confirm the results of blood experiments in section 2.1.7, the diameter of
suspended droplets were measured from the videos using ImageJ. The outer diameter of
the needles was used to calibrate the scale in the program. Since the suspended droplets
had a tear shape, both of the major and minor diameters were measured. Then, the
equivalent sphere diameter was calculated using the following equation:
Do  3 d minor d major
2
(20)
17
in equation 20, dminor and dmajor are the shorter and longer diameters of the suspended
droplets.
2.2.7 Procedure to Analyze Bloodstain Patterns
In order to investigate the experiment results, an origin was assigned as a reference
point. The origin was set as the location of the projection of the suspended droplet on the
first page. The X axis was taken to be positive in the direction where the droplets were
shot and it was zero at the edge of the page. The Y axis was taken to be positive in
upward direction and it was zero on the page. Since all the suspended droplets were in
front of the nozzle, the height was the same for all of them and it was measured to be
86mm. To analyze the experiment results, the following steps were taken repeatedly for
each set of data:
1) Apply stringing method to determine POC and PO
2) Calculate the initial velocity and height by projectile method assuming  o  0
3) Calculate the droplet diameters and initial velocities from the video
4) Calculate the drag force effect
5) Measure the diameter of suspended droplets from the videos
6) Repeat steps 1 to 5 as necessary
18
3. Results
3.1 List of Experiments
The blood experiments were conducted with 2 different needle sizes and 4 different
pressures. Each case was run 3 times, producing 24 sets of data in total. For the purpose
of analysis, one set of data from each case was investigated. In addition, for one case all
the results were analyzed. Table 3-1 shows the list of experiments which were studied.
10 Table 3-1 – List of Blood Experiments Used for Analysis

Needle Gauge Size Pressure [KPa] Test number
12 20 1
12 40 4
12 40 5
12 40 6
12 60 7
12 80 10
17 20 15
17 40 18
17 60 21
17 80 24
3.2 Point of Convergence
The results of determination of POC using the stringing method, figure 3-1 on the
next page, are shown below, table 3-2. This table gives the offset from the actual origin.
11 Table 3-2 – Error Associated with Determination of POC Using Stringing Method
Test # Gauge Size Pressure [KPa] Error [mm]
1 12 20 5
4 12 40 -7
5 12 40 10
6 12 40 16
7 12 60 10
10 12 80 -3
15 17 20 -10
18 17 40 0
21 17 60 -5
24 17 80 -8
Average 0.8
19
Figure 3-1– Stringing Method Applied to Test 4 (needle gauge 12 and pressure 40 KPa)
Note: the number shown at the bottom of each image corresponds to distance to the actual origin.
20
3.3 Point of Origin (Height)
The height was determined by three different approaches. Other than the stringing
and projectile methods which were previously discussed, the third approach was to take
the origin as the lowest height determined by the stringing method. The actual height was
86mm in all cases. The results of analysis are presented below in table 3-3 and 3-4
(sample calculation of error percentage is available at Appendix A):
12 Table 3-3 – Average Height Determined by Stringing and Projectile Methods

Stringing Method Projectile Method
Test Gauge Pressure
Lowest Average Average
# Size [KPa] Standard Standard
Height Height Height
Deviation Deviation
[mm] [mm] [mm]
1 12 20 92.0 150.0 64.6 74.7 32.0
4 12 40 102.0 138.1 43.2 70.2 19.2
5 12 40 134.7 177.7 37.2 87.9 17.6
6 12 40 109.0 130.1 21.7 67.1 10.1
7 12 60 92.4 113.0 18.1 56.1 9.3
10 12 80 83.2 123.3 31.3 61.6 16.6
15 17 20 90.1 112.6 28.9 58.1 13.1
18 17 40 106.7 124.8 22.9 63.4 11.7
21 17 60 76.4 101.3 18.8 50.9 7.5
24 17 80 89.8 120.1 31.9 60.0 14.1
Average 97.63 129.1 31.86 65.0 15.12
13 Table 3-4 – Percentage Error Associated with Different Approaches

Error %
Gauge Pressure
Test # Stringing Projectile Lowest Point in
Size [KPa]
Method Method Stringing Method
1 12 20 74.4 -13.1 7.0
4 12 40 60.6 -18.4 18.6
5 12 40 106.6 2.3 56.6
6 12 40 51.3 -22.0 26.7
7 12 60 31.4 -34.7 7.4
10 12 80 43.4 -28.4 -3.3
15 17 20 30.9 -32.4 4.8
18 17 40 45.1 -26.3 24.1
21 17 60 17.8 -40.8 -11.2
24 17 80 39.6 -30.2 4.4
Average 50.1 -24.4 13.5
21
3.4 Initial Velocity
The initial velocity was determined using two different approaches. First, it was
estimated using the equation 18, derived from the projectile motion equations. In the
second approach, the velocity was measured from the videos as explained in section
2.2.3. The results of the analysis are presented below in table 3-5 (sample calculation for
the error percentage is available at Appendix A). For the calculation of percent error, it
was assumed that the velocity obtained from the video is the actual velocity and the error
of projectile model was compared to that. In addition, the detachment process of droplet
from the needle in test 4 is shown in figure 3-2 on the next page. These pictures are taken
from the video at different times and they show what happens to the droplet during its
detachment from the needle in the first 40 ms (the detachment process of 5 other cases is
presented in Appendix B).
14 Table 3-5 – Initial Velocity Measured by Different Approaches

Projectile Equation Videos
Average Average
Gauge Pressure Error
Test # Initial Standard Initial Standard
Size [KPa] %
Velocity Deviation Velocity Deviation
[m/s] [m/s]
1 12 20 2.44 0.70 2.42 0.81 0.8
4 12 40 2.94 1.47 2.60 1.81 13.1
5 12 40 3.46 1.26 3.41 2.00 1.5
6 12 40 2.53 0.81 3.48 1.49 -27.3
7 12 60 3.45 1.00 3.60 1.78 -4.2
10 12 80 2.49 1.56 2.87 1.76 -13.2
15 17 20 2.64 0.78 4.37 2.32 -39.6
18 17 40 3.59 0.55 3.75 1.84 -4.3
21 17 60 3.52 1.38 3.96 1.96 -11.1
24 17 80 3.73 1.17 3.88 1.55 -3.9
Average -8.8
22
Figure 3-2 – Detachment Process during the First 40ms
Time Test 4 Time Test 4
[ms] Needle Gauge = 12 & Pressure = 40 [KPa] [ms] Needle Gauge = 12 & Pressure = 40 [KPa]
t=0 t=10
t=2 t=15
t=3 t=20
t=5 t=25
23
Figure 3-2 – Detachment Process during the First 40ms (continued)
Time Test 4
[ms] Needle Gauge = 12 & Pressure = 40 [KPa]
t=30
t=35
t=40
24
3.5 Experimental & Analytical Results
The experiment results of test 4 are presented below in tables 3-6, 3-7, 3-8 and 3-9 (for the sample calculations and results of other
tests refer to Appendix A and C respectively).
15 Table 3-6 – Relevant Information

Trial Number 4
Needle Gauge Size 12
Pressure [KPa] 40
Actual Height [mm] 86
Droplet Diameter Obtained from the Video [mm] 4.18
Error in Determining the Origin in the Direction [mm] -7
Table 3-7 – Results of Bloodstain Pattern Analysis

16
Stringing Method Projectile Method (θ = 0)

Major Axis Minor Axis Impact Angle Distance to Height Initial Traveling Height
Stain #
[mm] [mm] (degrees) POC [mm] [mm] Velocity [m/s] Time [s] [mm]
1 2.84 1.69 36.52 148 109.6 1.40 0.11 59.3
2 1.96 1.32 42.34 170 154.9 1.35 0.13 82.9
3 2.3 1.38 36.87 179 134.3 1.53 0.12 70.6
4 5.64 1.9 19.69 285 102.0 2.80 0.10 49.0
5 2.08 0.61 17.05 355 108.9 3.37 0.11 59.3
6 5.19 1.51 16.91 397 120.7 3.58 0.11 59.3
7 3.43 1.23 21.01 613 235.5 3.96 0.15 110.3
8 2.94 0.61 11.97 655 138.9 5.50 0.12 70.6
Average 138.1 2.94 70.2
Standard Deviation 43.2 1.47 19.2
Error% 60.6 -18.4
25
17 Table 3-8 – Results Deduced from the Video
Droplet Droplet Droplet First Last Traveling Traveled Initial
# Diameter [mm] Shape Frame Frame Time [s] Distance [mm] Velocity [m/s]
1 0.55 Sphere 18 21 0.003 18.2 6.07
2 0.61 Sphere 18 22 0.004 19.54 4.89
3 0.76 Sphere 20 25 0.005 11.07 2.21
4 1.36 Non-sphere 24 30 0.006 13.65 2.28
5 0.65 Sphere 25 29 0.004 25.74 6.44
6 1.16 Sphere 25 32 0.007 11.26 1.61
7 1.59 Non-sphere 28 35 0.007 16.75 2.39
8 1.4 Non-sphere 34 37 0.003 8.36 2.79
9 1.34 Non-sphere 34 37 0.003 9.64 3.21
10 1.23 Sphere 25 35 0.010 14.35 1.44
11 0.92 Sphere 25 41 0.016 18.14 1.13
12 0.8 Non-sphere 33 41 0.008 12.62 1.58
13 0.63 Sphere 29 42 0.013 14.47 1.11
14 1.51 Sphere 19 42 0.023 20.14 0.88
15 1.72 Sphere 28 48 0.020 19.96 1.00
Average 2.60
Standard Deviation 1.81
18 Table 3-9 – Effect of Drag Force

Droplet Droplet Velocity Reynolds Drag Volume acceleration XDrag XNo-Drag Error
# Diameter [mm] [m/s] Number Force [N] [m3] [m/s2] [mm] [mm] %
1 0.55 6.07 222.6 4.73E-06 8.71E-11 51.1 355.8 803.7 125.9
2 0.61 4.89 198.9 3.77E-06 1.19E-10 29.9 385.4 647.4 68.0
3 0.76 2.21 112.0 1.20E-06 2.30E-10 4.9 249.7 292.6 17.2
4 1.36 2.28 206.7 4.08E-06 1.32E-09 2.9 276.5 301.9 9.2
5 0.65 6.44 279.1 7.43E-06 1.44E-10 48.7 425.8 852.7 100.2
6 1.16 1.61 124.5 1.48E-06 8.17E-10 1.7 198.3 213.2 7.5
7 1.59 2.39 253.3 6.12E-06 2.10E-09 2.7 292.8 316.4 8.1
8 1.4 2.79 260.4 6.47E-06 1.44E-09 4.2 332.6 369.4 11.1

9 1.34 3.21 286.8 7.85E-06 1.26E-09 5.9 373.3 425.0 13.9
10 1.23 1.44 118.1 1.33E-06 9.74E-10 1.3 179.3 190.7 6.4
11 0.92 1.13 69.3 4.58E-07 4.08E-10 1.1 140.0 149.6 6.9
12 0.8 1.58 84.3 6.78E-07 2.68E-10 2.4 188.2 209.2 11.2
13 0.63 1.11 46.6 2.07E-07 1.31E-10 1.5 133.8 147.0 9.8
14 1.51 0.88 88.6 7.49E-07 1.80E-09 0.4 113.0 116.5 3.1
15 1.72 1.00 114.7 1.25E-06 2.66E-09 0.4 128.9 132.4 2.7
26
4. Discussion
4.1 Point of Convergence
The experiment results show that the stringing method is an accurate technique to
determine the point of convergence. The average error was 0.8mm and the maximum
error among all the cases was only 16mm from the origin. It is worthwhile mentioning
that only a few well-formed stains were selected to find the POC during analysis but this
did not affect the accuracy. The offset of POC from the origin in comparison to the
distances between the stains and the actual origin is negligible. Figures 4-1 and 4-2 show
the offset of the POC from the origin for the cases that were studied during the analysis.
Thus, it can be concluded that the stringing method is an acceptable approach to
determine the origin on the horizontal plane.
Figure 4-1 – Error Associated with Determination of

Point of Convergence (Gauge 12)
20
Test 6
15
Offset From Origin [mm]
Test 5
10
Test 4
0
20 40 40 40 60 80
-5
-10
Pressure [KPa]
27
Figure 4-2 – Error Associated with Determination of
Point of Convergence (Gauge 17)
0
20 40 60 80
Offset from Origin [mm]
-2
-4
-6
-8
-10
-12
Pressure [KPa]
4.2 Point of Origin (Height)
The stringing method over-estimates the point of origin as expected. In the best case
scenario, the height is estimated to be 101.3mm with a standard deviation of 18.8mm.
This estimation corresponds to test 21 (needle gauge 17 and pressure 60KPa) and it is off
by 17.8% from the actual height of 86mm. The second best estimation is deduced in test
15 (needle gauge 17 and pressure 20KPa) and the error in this case is 30.9% which is a
significant error. The worst estimation is obtained in case 5 with a 106.6% error. The
average error using this approach is 50.1% which is a large error. Thus, it seems the
stringing method is not a reliable technique to determine the point of origin. Not only it
results in an over-estimation but also the error in the results varies significantly from case
to case.
The projectile technique is not very accurate but it gives a better estimation than the
stringing method. The errors with this method are mostly in the range of 20 to 30%. The
28
best estimation with this approach is 88.9mm (case 5 with needle gauge of 12 and
pressure of 40 KPa) while the worst estimation is 50.9mm (case 21 with needle gauge of
17 and pressure of 60 KPa). These two cases correspond to 2.3% and -40.8% errors
respectively. Furthermore, the average error with this technique is -24.4% which means
the projectile approach results in an under-estimation of the actual height. The possible
reason for this under-estimation can be due to neglecting the small vertical component of
initial velocity. It was assumed that the shooting angle was zero which was validated
from the videos. However, this does not mean that the vertical component is absolutely
zero. It must be noted that the droplet, suspended from the needle, is scattered in different
directions when air is blown at it. Thus, the applied force to the droplet is not absolutely
horizontal. The small vertical component of initial velocity causes a downward force,
especially in high pressure cases. This downward force results in faster landing of the
scattered droplets and shorter traveled distances in the x direction. Subsequently, a shorter
traveled distance yields an under-estimation of the point of origin. Moreover, this
method is not applicable with the current knowledge in the field of BPA. This case is
considered in the analysis for comparison purposes since it is similar to the theoretical
model. The projectile motion equations require another independent variable to be known
in order to be applicable. A possible component can be the impact velocity which in
conjunction with impact angle will provide enough information.
As a third approach, the point of origin is taken as the lowest estimation of stringing
method in each test. The best estimation with this approach results in 4.4% error while
the worst estimation yields 51.6% error. All other cases are off by less than 27% and the
29
average error is 13.5%. Figures 4-4 and 4-5 show the offset of the estimations from the
point of origin in each case using the three techniques discussed above.
30
Comparing the average error percentages of the three cases considered above, the
third approach seems to be the best. It has the least amount of error among the three
methods. At the same time, it can be used on the field with the current knowledge in
BPA. Figure 4-5 shows the error percentage in each case as well as the average error
deduced by each method.
Figure 4-5 – Error Associated with Different Methods to

Determine the Height
120
Test 5 Stringing Method
110
100 Lowest Point in Stringing
90 Method
Test 1 Projectile Method
80
70 Test 4
60 Test 6 Average
50 Test 10 Test 18
Error %
Test 24
40 Test 7 Test 15
30
Test 21
20
10
0
-10 20 40 40 40 60 80 20 40 60 80
-20
-30
-40
-50
Pressure [KPa]
4.3 Initial Velocity
As was explained in the methodology section, the initial velocities were deduced
from two different approaches and the predicted velocity from projectile motions was
compared with the velocity measured from the videos. The results are in agreement with
fairly small error. The minimum error is 0.8% in test 1 (gauge size 12 and pressure
20KPa) and the maximum error is -39.6% in test 15 (gauge size 17 and pressure 20KPa).
31
The average error in determination of initial velocity is only -8.8% which is a small error.
Thus, it can be concluded that equation 18, used in the projectile method predicts the
initial velocity with good accuracy. Figures 4-6 and 4-7 show the values measured from
these two methods.
Figure 4-6 – Comparison of Initial Velocity (Gauge 12)
6.00
Video
Projectile Motion
5.00
Initial Velocity [m/s]
4.00
Test 5 Test 6
Test 4
3.00
2.00
1.00
0.00
20 40 40 40 60 80
Pressure [KPa]
Figure 4-7 – Comparison of Initial Velocity (Gauge 17)
8.00
Video
Projectile Motion
7.00
6.00
Initial Velocity [m/s]
5.00
4.00
3.00
2.00
1.00
0.00
20 40 60 80
Pressure [KPa]
32
4.4 Drag Force Effect
The effect of drag force on the horizontal motion of droplets was studied in the
analysis, the error percentage due to neglecting the drag varied a lot from case to case. No
pattern was identified in the results and in some cases the percent error was in the order
of 102. The variety of drag effect on the motion is expected since two factors affect the
value of this force, namely, velocity and diameter. The equations below show the relation
between the acceleration, velocity and diameter:
1  1  
FDrag  C D   AirV 2 A   C D   AirV 2  D 2 
2  2 4 
1  
C D   AirV 2  D 2 
FDrag 2 4  V2
a   Constant 
 Blood Q 4 D3 D
 Blood 
3 8
It can be observed that the acceleration is directly proportional to square of velocity and it
is inversely proportional to the droplet diameter. Changing any of these two factors has a
direct impact on the value of drag force which subsequently changes the error to
neglecting this force.
Figure 4-8, on the next page, shows the percent error obtained for different situations
if drag force is neglected. This graph shows that when the droplet size is small, drag force
must be taken into account. For bigger droplets, drag can be ignored for velocities up to
3m/s which will result in 10% error. Drag force must be considered in all high velocity
cases. Figure 4-8 also shows that the error increases exponentially when the droplet size
is very small or the velocity is high. This graph can be used to read the percent error due
to excluding the drag force from the analysis.
33
Figure 4-8 – Percent Error due to Neglecting the Drag
Force Effect
100
D = 0.2 mm D = 0.4 mm D = 0.6 mm D = 0.8 mm
90
D = 1.0 mm
80
70
D = 1.2 mm
60
Error %
50 D = 1.4 mm
40 D = 1.6 mm
30
20
10
0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Velocity (m/s)
4.5 Droplet diameter
The droplets formed with the gauge 12 and 17 needles were 4mm and 3mm in
diameters respectively. The diameters measured in the blood tests are slightly bigger than
what was measured from the videos. There are two factors that contribute to this
difference. Firstly, the droplets measured from the videos are still attached to the needles.
However, in the blood experiments, the diameter of a detached droplet is deduced which
is expected to be bigger than a suspended droplet. Secondly, forming a droplet at the tip
of the needle is a subjective process and droplets with different diameters can be formed
at the needles. This does not apply to the case where droplets are detached from the
needles and accumulated in a container.
34
5. Conclusions
The objective of the project was to investigate the accuracy of the stringing method
and provide a more accurate approach. Experiments confirmed that stringing method is
accurate in determining the point of convergence but it over-estimates the point of origin
and the error associated with this technique is significant. The average error was 50.1% in
this analysis. The projectile method, which is similar to the mathematical model, under-
estimated the origin and it resulted in -24.4% error. The third approach was to take the
lowest point found by stringing method as the point of origin. This seemed to be accurate
and the error was 13.5% on average. Thus, a good practical method is to apply stringing
method to different stains and take the lowest estimation as the point of origin.
The secondary objective of this thesis project was to study the effect of drag forces on
the motion of droplets. It was observed that the effect is different for each case and the
impact depends on two factors, namely, droplet velocity and diameter. The analysis
showed that drag effect cannot be ignored for small size droplets. For droplets greater
than 1mm, drag can be ignored at low velocities (up to 3m/s), resulting in 10% error. In
all cases, the error grows exponentially as the velocity increases. Thus, it would be
reasonable to conclude that ignoring the drag forces simplifies the analysis at the expense
of accuracy.
The objective of future work should be the determination of the impact velocity.
Knowing the impact velocity will validate the projectile motion equations. The
subsequent analysis will model the actual motion of the blood droplets.
35
References
[1] P. Pizzola, S. Roth and P. De Forest, Blood Droplet Dynamics – I, Journal of Forensic
Sciences, Volume 31, No.1, Jan 1986, pp. 36.
[2] International Association of Bloodstain Pattern Analysts, [Online], Available:

http://www.iabpa.org/ [Accessed: 10 Nov. 2008]
[3] S. James, P. Kish and T. Sutton, Principles of Bloodstain Pattern Analysis: Theory
and Practice, New York: CRC Press, 2005, pp. 3-4.
[4] L. Akin, Blood Pattern Analysis at Crime Scenes, 27 Sept. 2005, [Online], Available:
http://www.onsceneforensics.com/pdfs/bsa%20wikipedia.pdf [Accessed: 10 Nov.
2008]
[5] T. Bevel and R. Gardner, Bloodstain Pattern Analysis, Second edition, New York:
CRC Press, 2001, pp. 63-168.
[6] M. King, Bloodstain Pattern Analysis for Impacts at Acute Angles, BASC thesis,
University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada, 2006.
[8] F. White, Fluid Mechanics, Fifth edition, New York: McGraw Hill, 2003, pp. 476-
482.
[9] L. Smith, N. Mehdizadeh and S. Chandra, Deducing Drop Size and Impact Velocity
from Circular Bloodstains, Journal of Forensic Sciences, Volume 51, No.1, Jan
2005, pp. 3.
36
Appendices
37
Appendix A – Sample Calculations
38
Determining the Suspended Droplet Diameter (Section 2.1.7):
The sample calculations presented here corresponds to needle gauge 12 and trial 1:
Volume Method:
3Q 3  2  10 6 m 3
Do  2  3  23  4.40mm
4N 4    45
Mass Method:
3m 3  1.93  10 3 kg
Do  2  3  23  4.26mm
4N   Blood 4    45  1062kg / m 3
Video:
 3 3.20mm  3.53mm  3.42mm

2
D  3 d minor d major
2
Theoretical Traveling Time Assuming Zero Shooting Angle (Section 2.2.5):
1 2 1
y t   gt  voy t  y o  0.086m   9.807m / s 2  t 2  0  t  t  0.1324s
2 2
Percent Error in Estimation of Point of Origin (Section 3.3):
The sample calculations presented here corresponds to test 4(gauge size 12 and pressure
40 KPa):
y Stringing  y Actual 138.1mm  86mm

Error %   100   100  60.6%
y Actual 86mm
y Lowest Point From Stringing  y Actual 102.0mm  86mm

Error %   100   100  18.6%
y Actual 86mm
y Pr ojectile  y Actual 70.2mm  86mm

Error %   100   100  18.4%
y Actual 86mm
39
Percent Error in Estimation of Initial Velocity (Section 3.4):
The sample calculation presented here corresponds to test 4(gauge size 12 and pressure
40 KPa):
VPr ojectile  VVideo 2.94m / s  2.60m / s

Error %   100   100  13.1%
VVideo 2.60m / s
Sample calculations of tables 3-7, 3-8 and 3-9 (section 3.5):
The sample calculations presented here corresponds to the stain 1 in case 4 (gauge size 12
and pressure 40 KPa):
Impact angle:
W 1.69  1.69 
sin       sin 1    36.52

L 2.84  2.84 
Height using stringing method:
y  tan   POC  tan 36.5  148mm  109.6mm
Initial velocity by projectile method (assuming zero shooting angle):
xg 0.148m  9.807m / s 2
v0    1.40m / s
tan  tan 36.5 cos 2 0
Traveling time by projectile method (assuming zero shooting angle):
tan  cos  o v o tan 36.52  cos 0  1.40m / s

t   0.11s
g 9.807 m / s 2
Height by projectile method (assuming zero shooting angle):
1 2 1
y t   gt  voy t  y o   9.807m / s 2  0.11s   0  0.11s  0  0.0593m  59.3mm
2
2 2
40
Initial velocity obtained from video:
# of frames  last frame - first frame  21 - 18  3
Traveling time  3  0.001  0.003s
Traveled distance 0.0182m

Initial Velocity    6.07 m / s
Traveling Time 0.003s
Reynolds number:
 airVD 1.2kg / m 3  6.07 m / s  0.55  10 3 m

Re    222.6
 1.8  10 5 kg / m.s
Drag force:

1  1
 2

FDrag  C D   air V 2 A   1    1.2kg / m 3  6.07m / s    0.55m  10 3   5.25  10 6 N
2
2  2 4 
Volume:
2
4 3 4  0.55  10 3 m 
Q  r      8.71  10 11 m 3
3 3  2 
Acceleration:
FDrag 5.25  10 6 N
a   56.8m / s
 blood Q 1062kg / m 3  8.71  10 11 m 3
XDrag:
1 2 1
xt   at  v ox t  xo   56.8m / s  0.1324s   6.07 m / s  0.1324 s  0  305.8mm
2
2 2
XNo-Drag:
xt   vox t  xo  6.07m / s  0.1324s  0  803.7mm
Percent Error for Drag:
X No  Drag  X Drag 803.7 mm  305.8mm

Error %   100   100  162.8%
X Drag 305.8mm
41
Appendix B – Detachment Process of
Droplet from the Needle
42
Figure B1- Droplet Detachment Process of Test 1 & 4
Time Test 1 Test 4
[ms] Needle Gauge = 12 & Pressure = 20 [KPa] Needle Gauge = 12 & Pressure = 40 [KPa]
t=0
t=2
t=3
t=5
43
Figure B1- Droplet Detachment Process of Test 1 & 4 (Continued)
Time Test 1 Test 4
t=10
t=15
t=20
t=25
44
Figure B1- Droplet Detachment Process of Test 1 & 4 (Continued)
Time Test 1 Test 4
t=30
t=35
t=40
45
Figure B2 - Droplet Detachment Process of Test 7 & 10
Time Test 7 Test 10
t=0
t=2
t=3
t=5
46
Figure B2 - Droplet Detachment Process of Test 7 & 10 (Continued)
Time Test 7 Test 10
t=10
t=15
t=20
t=25
47
Time Test 7 Test 10
t=30
t=35
t=40
48
Figure B3 - Droplet Detachment Process of Test 15 & 18
Time Test 15 Test 18
t=0
t=2
t=3
t=5
49
t=10
t=15
t=20
t=25
50
t=30
t=35
t=40
51
Appendix C – Experimental & Analytical
Results of All the Blood Experiments
52
19 Table C1 – Relevant Information on Test 1
Trial Number 1
Pressure [KPa] 20
Error in Determining the Origin in the Direction [mm] 5
20 Table C2 – Results of the Blood Pattern Analysis of Test 1

Stain #
1 1.68 1.04 38.25 186 146.6 1.52 0.12 70.6
2 2.45 1.23 30.14 199 115.5 1.83 0.11 59.3
3 6.82 2.9 25.16 218 102.4 2.13 0.10 49.0
4 3.14 1.14 21.29 236 92.0 2.44 0.10 49.0
5 2.51 0.98 22.98 332 140.8 2.77 0.12 70.6
6 2.05 1.07 31.46 463 283.3 2.72 0.17 141.7
7 3.31 1.1 19.41 480 169.1 3.66 0.13 82.9
Average 150 2.44 74.7
Error% 74.38 -13.1
53
21 Table C3 – Results Deduced from the Video of Test 1
Droplet Droplet Droplet First Last Traveling Traveled Velocity
# Diameter [mm] Shape Frame Frame Time [s] Distance [mm] [m/s]
1 0.54 Sphere 19 26 0.007 10.63 1.52
2 0.73 Sphere 24 28 0.004 10.84 2.71
3 0.53 Non-sphere 28 34 0.006 10.82 1.80
4 0.7 Non-sphere 29 37 0.008 21.67 2.71
5 1.24 Non-sphere 34 43 0.009 15.58 1.73
6 0.9 Sphere 31 38 0.007 16.97 2.42
7 0.84 Sphere 35 40 0.005 19.53 3.91
8 1.07 Non-sphere 38 48 0.010 24.36 2.44
9 0.93 Sphere 34 49 0.015 31.34 2.09
10 1.57 Sphere 37 50 0.013 24.86 1.91
11 0.62 Sphere 34 37 0.003 12.37 4.12
12 0.87 Sphere 38 44 0.006 12.34 2.06
13 0.52 Non-sphere 18 21 0.003 9.66 3.22
14 0.6 Non-sphere 22 27 0.005 11.29 2.26
15 0.62 Sphere 37 46 0.009 12.73 1.41
Average 2.42
22 Table C4 – Effect of Drag Force (Test 1)

Droplet
Droplet Velocity Reynolds Drag Volume acceleration XDrag XNo-Drag Error
Diameter
# [m/s] Number Force [N] [m3] [m/s2] [mm] [mm] %
[mm]
1 0.54 1.52 54.7 2.86E-07 8.24E-11 3.3 172.3 201.2 16.8
2 0.73 2.71 131.9 1.66E-06 2.04E-10 7.7 291.3 358.8 23.2
3 0.53 1.80 63.6 3.86E-07 7.80E-11 4.7 197.1 238.3 20.9
4 0.7 2.71 126.5 1.53E-06 1.80E-10 8.0 288.7 358.8 24.3
5 1.24 1.73 143.0 1.95E-06 9.98E-10 1.8 213.3 229.1 7.4
6 0.9 2.42 145.2 2.01E-06 3.82E-10 5.0 276.6 320.4 15.8
7 0.84 3.91 219.0 4.58E-06 3.10E-10 13.9 395.9 517.7 30.8
8 1.07 2.44 174.1 2.89E-06 6.41E-10 4.2 286.2 323.1 12.9
9 0.93 2.09 129.6 1.60E-06 4.21E-10 3.6 245.2 276.7 12.9
10 1.57 1.91 199.9 3.81E-06 2.03E-09 1.8 237.1 252.9 6.7
11 0.62 4.12 170.3 2.77E-06 1.25E-10 20.9 362.3 545.5 50.6
12 0.87 2.06 119.5 1.36E-06 3.45E-10 3.7 240.3 272.7 13.5
13 0.52 3.22 111.6 1.19E-06 7.36E-11 15.2 293.1 426.3 45.5
14 0.6 2.26 90.4 7.80E-07 1.13E-10 6.5 242.3 299.2 23.5
15 0.62 1.41 58.3 3.24E-07 1.25E-10 2.4 165.6 186.7 12.7
54
Trial Number 4
Pressure [KPa] 40

Stain #
1 2.84 1.69 36.52 148 109.6 1.40 0.11 59.3
2 1.96 1.32 42.34 170 154.9 1.35 0.13 82.9
3 2.3 1.38 36.87 179 134.3 1.53 0.12 70.6
4 5.64 1.9 19.69 285 102 2.80 0.10 49.0
5 2.08 0.61 17.05 355 108.9 3.37 0.11 59.3
6 5.19 1.51 16.91 397 120.7 3.58 0.11 59.3
7 3.43 1.23 21.01 613 235.5 3.96 0.15 110.3
8 2.94 0.61 11.97 655 138.9 5.50 0.12 70.6
Average 138.1 2.94 70.2
Error% 60.57 -18.4
55
1 0.55 Sphere 18 21 0.003 18.2 6.07
2 0.61 Sphere 18 22 0.004 19.54 4.89
3 0.76 Sphere 20 25 0.005 11.07 2.21
4 1.36 Non-sphere 24 30 0.006 13.65 2.28
5 0.65 Sphere 25 29 0.004 25.74 6.44
6 1.16 Sphere 25 32 0.007 11.26 1.61
7 1.59 Non-sphere 28 35 0.007 16.75 2.39
8 1.4 Non-sphere 34 37 0.003 8.36 2.79
9 1.34 Non-sphere 34 37 0.003 9.64 3.21
10 1.23 Sphere 25 35 0.010 14.35 1.44
11 0.92 Sphere 25 41 0.016 18.14 1.13
12 0.8 Non-sphere 33 41 0.008 12.62 1.58
13 0.63 Sphere 29 42 0.013 14.47 1.11
14 1.51 Sphere 19 42 0.023 20.14 0.88
15 1.72 Sphere 28 48 0.020 19.96 1.00
Average 2.60

Droplet
Diameter
[mm]
1 0.55 6.07 222.6 4.73E-06 8.71E-11 51.1 355.8 803.7 125.9
2 0.61 4.89 198.9 3.77E-06 1.19E-10 29.9 385.4 647.4 68.0
3 0.76 2.21 112.0 1.20E-06 2.30E-10 4.9 249.7 292.6 17.2
4 1.36 2.28 206.7 4.08E-06 1.32E-09 2.9 276.5 301.9 9.2
5 0.65 6.44 279.1 7.43E-06 1.44E-10 48.7 425.8 852.7 100.2
6 1.16 1.61 124.5 1.48E-06 8.17E-10 1.7 198.3 213.2 7.5
7 1.59 2.39 253.3 6.12E-06 2.10E-09 2.7 292.8 316.4 8.1
8 1.4 2.79 260.4 6.47E-06 1.44E-09 4.2 332.6 369.4 11.1
9 1.34 3.21 286.8 7.85E-06 1.26E-09 5.9 373.3 425.0 13.9
10 1.23 1.44 118.1 1.33E-06 9.74E-10 1.3 179.3 190.7 6.4
11 0.92 1.13 69.3 4.58E-07 4.08E-10 1.1 140.0 149.6 6.9
12 0.8 1.58 84.3 6.78E-07 2.68E-10 2.4 188.2 209.2 11.2
13 0.63 1.11 46.6 2.07E-07 1.31E-10 1.5 133.8 147.0 9.8
14 1.51 0.88 88.6 7.49E-07 1.80E-09 0.4 113.0 116.5 3.1
15 1.72 1.00 114.7 1.25E-06 2.66E-09 0.4 128.9 132.4 2.7
56
Trial Number 5
Pressure [KPa] 40
Table C10 – Results of the Blood Pattern Analysis of Test 5

28

Stain #
1 2.83 1.62 34.92 214 149.4 1.73 0.12 70.6
2 2 0.89 26.42 277 137.6 2.34 0.12 70.6
3 2.97 1.49 30.11 371 215.2 2.50 0.15 110.3
4 2.67 1.05 23.16 380 162.5 2.95 0.13 82.9
5 2.16 0.76 20.60 472 177.4 3.51 0.13 82.9
6 2.38 1.02 25.38 492 233.4 3.19 0.15 110.3
7 2.73 0.6 12.70 598 134.7 5.10 0.12 70.6
8 5.21 1.65 18.46 666 222.4 4.42 0.15 110.3
9 5.63 1.31 13.46 697 166.8 5.35 0.13 82.9
Average 177.7 3.46 87.9
Error% 106.64 2.3
57
1 0.59 Sphere 18 20 0.002 13.71 6.86
2 0.65 Sphere 18 22 0.004 15.63 3.91
3 0.78 Sphere 22 24 0.002 16.19 8.10
4 0.69 Sphere 22 26 0.004 8.53 2.13
5 0.88 Sphere 23 26 0.003 7.87 2.62
6 0.66 Sphere 24 29 0.005 12.77 2.55
7 0.6 Sphere 21 25 0.004 10.47 2.62
8 0.8 Sphere 25 27 0.002 8.71 4.36
9 0.63 Sphere 23 28 0.005 12.79 2.56
10 0.6 Sphere 23 26 0.003 15.46 5.15
11 0.91 Sphere 24 29 0.005 15.45 3.09
12 1.03 Non-sphere 28 34 0.006 18.97 3.16
13 1.04 Sphere 29 35 0.006 10.3 1.72
14 0.59 Sphere 27 36 0.009 13.51 1.50
15 0.49 Sphere 36 50 0.014 11.25 0.80
Average 3.41

Droplet
Diameter
[mm]
1 0.59 6.86 269.8 6.95E-06 1.08E-10 60.8 375.4 908.3 142.0
2 0.65 3.91 169.4 2.74E-06 1.44E-10 17.9 360.8 517.7 43.5
3 0.78 8.10 421.2 1.69E-05 2.48E-10 64.2 509.7 1072.4 110.4
4 0.69 2.13 98.0 9.16E-07 1.72E-10 5.0 238.2 282.0 18.4
5 0.88 2.62 153.7 2.25E-06 3.57E-10 5.9 295.2 346.9 17.5
6 0.66 2.55 112.2 1.20E-06 1.51E-10 7.5 271.9 337.6 24.2
7 0.6 2.62 104.8 1.05E-06 1.13E-10 8.7 270.6 346.9 28.2
8 0.8 4.36 232.5 5.16E-06 2.68E-10 18.1 418.6 577.3 37.9
9 0.63 2.56 107.5 1.10E-06 1.31E-10 7.9 269.7 338.9 25.7
10 0.6 5.15 206.0 4.05E-06 1.13E-10 33.7 386.5 681.9 76.4
11 0.91 3.09 187.5 3.35E-06 3.95E-10 8.0 339.0 409.1 20.7
12 1.03 3.16 217.0 4.49E-06 5.72E-10 7.4 353.5 418.4 18.3
13 1.04 1.72 119.3 1.36E-06 5.89E-10 2.2 208.4 227.7 9.3
14 0.59 1.50 59.0 3.32E-07 1.08E-10 2.9 173.2 198.6 14.7
15 0.49 0.80 26.1 6.52E-08 6.16E-11 1.0 97.2 105.9 9.0
58
Trial Number 6
Pressure [KPa] 40

32

Stain #
1 2.75 1.78 40.34 133 112.9 1.24 0.11 59.3
2 1.91 0.89 27.77 207 109 1.96 0.11 59.3
3 1.76 0.76 25.58 245 117.3 2.24 0.11 59.3
4 1.68 0.86 30.79 267 159.1 2.10 0.13 82.9
5 2.56 1.25 29.23 294 164.5 2.27 0.13 82.9
6 2.88 0.93 18.84 323 110.2 3.05 0.11 59.3
7 2.24 0.89 23.41 342 148.1 2.78 0.12 70.6
8 4.57 1.59 20.36 353 131 3.05 0.12 70.6
9 5.33 1.37 14.89 447 118.9 4.06 0.11 59.3
Average 13.01 2.53 67.1
Error% 51.29 -22.0
59
1 0.54 Sphere 14 17 0.003 22.93 7.64
2 0.5 Sphere 18 21 0.003 14.71 4.90
3 0.73 Sphere 19 23 0.004 19.35 4.84
4 0.75 Sphere 21 25 0.004 18.51 4.63
5 0.78 Sphere 21 25 0.004 16.82 4.21
6 0.59 Sphere 20 24 0.004 13.11 3.28
7 0.68 Sphere 22 27 0.005 13.69 2.74
8 0.74 Sphere 22 27 0.005 15.76 3.15
9 0.75 Sphere 25 31 0.006 13.99 2.33
10 0.52 Sphere 20 26 0.006 19.98 3.33
11 0.62 Sphere 26 31 0.005 12.16 2.43
12 0.92 Non-sphere 31 35 0.004 12.82 3.21
13 0.84 Sphere 29 35 0.006 16.1 2.68
14 0.93 Sphere 36 47 0.011 20.15 1.83
15 0.81 Sphere 33 39 0.006 15.56 2.59
16 0.93 Sphere 27 35 0.008 14.63 1.83
Average 3.48

Droplet
Diameter
[mm]
1 0.54 7.64 275.0 7.22E-06 8.24E-11 82.4 289.3 1011.5 249.6
2 0.5 4.90 163.3 2.55E-06 6.54E-11 36.6 328.0 648.8 97.8
3 0.73 4.84 235.5 5.29E-06 2.04E-10 24.5 426.1 640.8 50.4
4 0.75 4.63 231.5 5.11E-06 2.21E-10 21.8 421.9 613.0 45.3
5 0.78 4.21 218.9 4.57E-06 2.48E-10 17.3 405.8 557.4 37.4
6 0.59 3.28 129.0 1.59E-06 1.08E-10 13.9 312.4 434.3 39.0
7 0.68 2.74 124.2 1.47E-06 1.65E-10 8.4 289.2 362.8 25.5
8 0.74 3.15 155.4 2.30E-06 2.12E-10 10.2 327.7 417.1 27.3
9 0.75 2.33 116.5 1.30E-06 2.21E-10 5.5 260.3 308.5 18.5
10 0.52 3.33 115.4 1.27E-06 7.36E-11 16.3 298.0 440.9 47.9
11 0.62 2.43 100.4 9.63E-07 1.25E-10 7.3 257.7 321.7 24.8
12 0.92 3.21 196.9 3.70E-06 4.08E-10 8.5 350.5 425.0 21.3
13 0.84 2.68 150.1 2.15E-06 3.10E-10 6.5 297.9 354.8 19.1
14 0.93 1.83 113.5 1.23E-06 4.21E-10 2.7 218.6 242.3 10.8
15 0.81 2.59 139.9 1.87E-06 2.78E-10 6.3 287.7 342.9 19.2
16 0.93 1.83 113.5 1.23E-06 4.21E-10 2.7 218.6 242.3 10.8
60
Trial Number 7
Pressure [KPa] 60

36

Stain #
1 2.79 1.02 21.44 260 102.1 2.55 0.10 49.0
2 2.83 0.89 18.33 279 92.4 2.87 0.10 49.0
3 2.04 0.74 21.27 309 120.3 2.79 0.11 59.3
4 2.08 0.78 22.02 340 137.5 2.87 0.12 70.6
5 2.21 0.57 14.95 352 94 3.60 0.10 49.0
6 2.98 0.82 15.97 376 107.6 3.59 0.10 49.0
7 1.99 0.7 20.59 385 144.7 3.17 0.12 70.6
8 4.19 1.1 15.22 392 106.7 3.76 0.10 49.0
9 5.35 0.94 10.12 626 111.7 5.86 0.11 59.3
Average 113.0 3.45 56.1
Error% 31.40 -34.7
61
1 0.53 Sphere 15 18 0.003 20.75 6.92
2 0.51 Sphere 16 19 0.003 17.11 5.70
3 0.53 Sphere 16 19 0.003 17.79 5.93
4 0.66 Sphere 17 19 0.002 6.14 3.07
5 0.58 Non-sphere 19 22 0.003 15.07 5.02
6 0.6 Non-sphere 20 24 0.004 16.94 4.24
7 0.48 Sphere 20 24 0.004 17.03 4.26
8 0.44 Sphere 22 25 0.003 12.91 4.30
9 0.71 Sphere 23 26 0.003 10.97 3.66
10 0.67 Sphere 26 29 0.003 9.93 3.31
11 0.86 Non-sphere 30 32 0.002 9.65 4.83
12 0.39 Sphere 30 37 0.007 15.56 2.22
13 0.41 Sphere 32 37 0.005 12.41 2.48
14 0.62 Sphere 29 40 0.011 14 1.27
15 1.02 Sphere 24 45 0.021 21.62 1.03
16 1.23 Sphere 37 47 0.01 11.05 1.11
17 0.87 Sphere 31 40 0.009 15.91 1.77
Average 3.60

Droplet
Diameter
[mm]
1 0.53 6.92 244.5 5.70E-06 7.80E-11 68.9 312.3 916.2 193.4
2 0.51 5.70 193.8 3.58E-06 6.95E-11 48.6 328.7 754.7 129.6
3 0.53 5.93 209.5 4.19E-06 7.80E-11 50.6 341.6 785.1 129.8
4 0.66 3.07 135.1 1.74E-06 1.51E-10 10.9 310.9 406.5 30.7
5 0.58 5.02 194.1 3.60E-06 1.02E-10 33.1 374.5 664.6 77.5
6 0.6 4.24 169.6 2.74E-06 1.13E-10 22.9 360.7 561.4 55.7
7 0.48 4.26 136.3 1.77E-06 5.79E-11 28.8 311.6 564.0 81.0
8 0.44 4.30 126.1 1.52E-06 4.46E-11 32.1 288.0 569.3 97.7
9 0.71 3.66 173.2 2.86E-06 1.87E-10 14.4 358.4 484.6 35.2
10 0.67 3.31 147.8 2.09E-06 1.57E-10 12.5 328.7 438.2 33.3
11 0.86 4.83 276.9 7.32E-06 3.33E-10 20.7 458.1 639.5 39.6
12 0.39 2.22 57.7 3.18E-07 3.11E-11 9.6 209.8 293.9 40.1
13 0.41 2.48 67.8 4.38E-07 3.61E-11 11.4 228.4 328.4 43.7
14 0.62 1.27 52.5 2.63E-07 1.25E-10 2.0 150.6 168.1 11.6
15 1.02 1.03 70.0 4.68E-07 5.56E-10 0.8 129.4 136.4 5.4
16 1.23 1.11 91.0 7.91E-07 9.74E-10 0.8 140.0 147.0 5.0
17 0.87 1.77 102.7 1.01E-06 3.45E-10 2.7 210.7 234.3 11.2
62
Trial Number 10
Pressure [KPa] 80

Stain #
1 2.37 1.5 39.27 142 116.1 1.31 0.11 59.3
2 3.55 2.08 35.87 165 119.3 1.50 0.11 59.3
3 2.02 1.38 43.09 203 189.9 1.46 0.14 96.1
4 2.65 1.5 34.47 205 140.8 1.71 0.12 70.6
5 2.04 0.94 27.44 213 110.6 2.01 0.11 59.3
6 3.18 1.53 28.76 220 120.7 1.98 0.11 59.3
7 3.59 0.69 11.08 425 83.2 4.61 0.09 39.7
8 3.92 0.74 10.88 552 106.1 5.31 0.10 49.0
Average 123.3 2.49 61.6
Error% 43.42 -28.4
63
1 0.40 Sphere 18 20 0.002 10.92 5.46
2 0.53 Sphere 18 20 0.002 14.13 7.07
3 0.72 Sphere 19 23 0.004 12.61 3.15
4 0.83 Sphere 22 26 0.004 9.9 2.48
5 0.76 Sphere 27 30 0.003 11.75 3.92
6 0.8 Sphere 26 31 0.005 13.08 2.62
7 0.72 Sphere 28 33 0.005 12.33 2.47
8 0.68 Sphere 28 33 0.005 8.83 1.77
9 0.62 Sphere 26 32 0.006 11.18 1.86
10 0.74 Sphere 26 32 0.006 14.14 2.36
11 0.84 Sphere 27 34 0.007 10.55 1.51
12 0.9 Sphere 27 34 0.007 10.62 1.52
13 1.05 Sphere 28 35 0.007 11.59 1.66
14 0.87 Non-sphere 29 31 0.002 11.16 5.58
15 1.02 Non-sphere 31 38 0.007 10.57 1.51
16 0.99 Sphere 25 46 0.021 19.81 0.94
Average 2.87

Droplet
Diameter
[mm]
1 0.40 5.46 145.6 2.02E-06 3.35E-11 56.8 225.1 722.9 221.2
2 0.53 7.07 249.8 5.95E-06 7.80E-11 71.9 305.9 936.1 206.0
3 0.72 3.15 151.2 2.18E-06 1.95E-10 10.5 325.0 417.1 28.3
4 0.83 2.48 137.2 1.80E-06 2.99E-10 5.7 278.4 328.4 17.9
5 0.76 3.92 198.6 3.76E-06 2.30E-10 15.4 384.0 519.0 35.1
6 0.8 2.62 139.7 1.86E-06 2.68E-10 6.5 289.9 346.9 19.7
7 0.72 2.47 118.6 1.34E-06 1.95E-10 6.5 270.1 327.0 21.1
8 0.68 1.77 80.2 6.14E-07 1.65E-10 3.5 203.7 234.3 15.1
9 0.62 1.86 76.9 5.64E-07 1.25E-10 4.3 208.6 246.3 18.1
10 0.74 2.36 116.4 1.29E-06 2.12E-10 5.7 262.5 312.5 19.0
11 0.84 1.51 84.6 6.82E-07 3.10E-10 2.1 181.5 199.9 10.1
12 0.9 1.52 91.2 7.94E-07 3.82E-10 2.0 183.7 201.2 9.5
13 1.05 1.66 116.2 1.29E-06 6.06E-10 2.0 202.3 219.8 8.7
14 0.87 5.58 323.6 1.00E-05 3.45E-10 27.3 499.5 738.8 47.9
15 1.02 1.51 102.7 1.01E-06 5.56E-10 1.7 185.0 199.9 8.1
16 0.99 0.94 62.0 3.67E-07 5.08E-10 0.7 118.3 124.5 5.2
64
Trial Number 15
Pressure [KPa] 20

44

Stain #
1 2.82 1.41 30.00 156 90.1 1.63 0.10 49.0
2 1.55 0.74 28.52 203 110.3 1.91 0.11 59.3
3 3.31 1.16 20.52 255 95.4 2.59 0.10 49.0
4 5.92 2.00 19.75 273 98.0 2.73 0.10 49.0
5 1.72 0.49 16.55 380 112.9 3.54 0.11 59.3
6 2.12 0.74 20.43 453 168.7 3.45 0.13 82.9
Average 112.6 2.64 58.1
Error% 30.90 -32.4
65
1 0.35 Sphere 16 17 0.001 5.96 5.96
2 0.36 Sphere 16 18 0.002 12.25 6.13
3 0.65 Non-sphere 18 19 0.001 8.05 8.05
4 0.43 Non-sphere 19 23 0.004 21.32 5.33
5 0.55 Sphere 19 21 0.002 17.72 8.86
6 0.71 Sphere 20 23 0.003 14.71 4.90
7 0.66 Sphere 23 26 0.003 10.96 3.65
8 0.92 Non-sphere 23 27 0.004 13.3 3.33
9 0.53 Sphere 24 27 0.003 8.91 2.97
10 0.43 Sphere 25 30 0.005 22.51 4.50
11 1.52 Sphere 25 31 0.006 15.7 2.62
12 1.01 Sphere 24 35 0.011 19.58 1.78
13 1.2 Non-sphere 25 32 0.007 11.52 1.65
14 0.74 Sphere 27 42 0.015 21.84 1.46
Average 4.37

Droplet
Diameter
[mm]
1 0.35 5.96 139.1 1.85E-06 2.24E-11 77.4 110.7 789.1 612.8
2 0.36 6.13 147.1 2.07E-06 2.44E-11 79.6 113.9 811.6 612.4
3 0.65 8.05 348.8 1.16E-05 1.44E-10 76.0 399.7 1065.8 166.7
4 0.43 5.33 152.8 2.23E-06 4.16E-11 50.4 263.9 705.7 167.4
5 0.55 8.86 324.9 1.01E-05 8.71E-11 108.9 218.6 1173.1 436.7
6 0.71 4.90 231.9 5.13E-06 1.87E-10 25.8 422.6 648.8 53.5
7 0.66 3.65 160.6 2.46E-06 1.51E-10 15.4 348.3 483.3 38.8
8 0.92 3.33 204.2 3.98E-06 4.08E-10 9.2 360.3 440.9 22.4
9 0.53 2.97 104.9 1.05E-06 7.80E-11 12.7 281.9 393.2 39.5
10 0.43 4.50 129.0 1.59E-06 4.16E-11 35.9 281.1 595.8 111.9
11 1.52 2.62 265.5 6.73E-06 1.84E-09 3.4 317.1 346.9 9.4
12 1.01 1.78 119.9 1.37E-06 5.39E-10 2.4 214.6 235.7 9.8
13 1.2 1.65 132.0 1.66E-06 9.05E-10 1.7 203.6 218.5 7.3
14 0.74 1.46 72.0 4.95E-07 2.12E-10 2.2 174.0 193.3 11.1
66
Trial Number 18
Pressure [KPa] 40
Error in Determining the Origin in the Direction [mm] 0.0

48

Stain #
1 1.92 0.69 21.06 277 106.7 2.66 0.10 49.0
2 3.49 0.96 15.97 388 111 3.65 0.11 59.3
3 3.04 1.1 21.21 414 160.7 3.23 0.13 82.9
4 2.85 0.7 14.22 430 109 4.08 0.11 59.3
5 6 1.55 14.97 430 115 3.97 0.11 59.3
6 5.27 1.53 16.88 482 146.2 3.95 0.12 70.6
Average 124.8 3.59 63.4
Error% 45.07 -26.3
67
1 0.45 Sphere 14 15 0.001 7.31 7.31
2 0.36 Sphere 16 17 0.001 5.56 5.56
3 0.51 Non-sphere 17 18 0.001 5.49 5.49
4 0.42 Non-sphere 16 17 0.001 5.43 5.43
5 0.47 Sphere 18 20 0.002 7.37 3.69
6 0.57 Non-sphere 22 24 0.002 7.66 3.83
7 0.47 Sphere 21 27 0.006 10.02 1.67
8 0.54 Sphere 20 23 0.003 19.5 6.50
9 0.42 Sphere 20 25 0.005 19.91 3.98
10 0.54 Sphere 21 29 0.008 18.47 2.31
11 0.65 Sphere 25 32 0.007 13.64 1.95
12 0.65 Sphere 21 28 0.007 17.36 2.48
13 0.77 Sphere 25 33 0.008 13.77 1.72
14 1.31 Non-sphere 31 34 0.003 13.73 4.58
15 0.64 Non-sphere 33 35 0.002 7.18 3.59
16 1.24 Sphere 34 38 0.004 11.24 2.81
17 0.78 Non-sphere 34 48 0.014 12.96 0.93
Average 3.75

Droplet
Diameter
[mm]
1 0.45 7.31 219.3 4.59E-06 4.77E-11 90.6 173.7 967.8 457.0
2 0.36 5.56 133.4 1.70E-06 2.44E-11 65.5 162.0 736.1 354.3
3 0.51 5.49 186.7 3.32E-06 6.95E-11 45.1 331.6 726.9 119.2
4 0.42 5.43 152.0 2.21E-06 3.88E-11 53.5 250.0 718.9 187.6
5 0.47 3.69 115.6 1.28E-06 5.44E-11 22.1 294.9 488.6 65.7
6 0.57 3.83 145.5 2.02E-06 9.70E-11 19.6 335.3 507.1 51.2
7 0.47 1.67 52.3 2.61E-07 5.44E-11 4.5 181.7 221.1 21.7
8 0.54 6.50 234.0 5.23E-06 8.24E-11 59.7 337.3 860.6 155.1
9 0.42 3.98 111.4 1.19E-06 3.88E-11 28.8 274.5 527.0 92.0
10 0.54 2.31 83.2 6.60E-07 8.24E-11 7.5 240.1 305.8 27.4
11 0.65 1.95 84.5 6.81E-07 1.44E-10 4.5 218.7 258.2 18.0
12 0.65 2.48 107.5 1.10E-06 1.44E-10 7.2 265.2 328.4 23.8
13 0.77 1.72 88.3 7.44E-07 2.39E-10 2.9 202.3 227.7 12.6
14 1.31 4.58 400.0 1.53E-05 1.18E-09 12.2 499.5 606.4 21.4
15 0.64 3.59 153.2 2.24E-06 1.37E-10 15.4 340.3 475.3 39.7
16 1.24 2.81 232.3 5.15E-06 9.98E-10 4.9 329.1 372.0 13.1
17 0.78 0.93 48.4 2.23E-07 2.48E-10 0.8 116.1 123.1 6.0
68
Trial Number 21
Pressure [KPa] 60

52

Stain #
1 2.37 1.43 37.11 157 118.8 1.43 0.11 59.3
2 3.4 1.07 18.34 267 88.5 2.81 0.10 49.0
3 3.68 0.76 11.92 362 76.4 4.10 0.09 39.7
4 4.27 1.08 14.65 370 96.7 3.73 0.10 49.0
5 1.81 0.55 17.69 398 126.9 3.50 0.11 59.3
6 4.75 0.83 10.06 565 100.3 5.59 0.10 49.0
Average 101.3 3.52 50.9
Error% 17.76 -40.8
69
1 0.37 Sphere 16 18 0.002 10.14 5.07
2 0.35 Non-sphere 18 20 0.002 11.92 5.96
3 0.37 Sphere 17 20 0.003 10 3.33
4 0.7 Sphere 18 21 0.003 13.04 4.35
5 1.15 Non-sphere 20 22 0.002 7.15 3.58
6 0.45 Sphere 23 25 0.002 13.03 6.52
7 0.43 Sphere 23 25 0.002 11.27 5.64
8 0.5 Sphere 23 26 0.003 22.69 7.56
9 0.69 Non-sphere 30 34 0.004 15.61 3.90
10 0.55 Non-sphere 29 34 0.005 20.58 4.12
11 0.45 Sphere 25 31 0.006 13.97 2.33
12 0.74 Sphere 29 39 0.01 13.87 1.39
13 0.9 Sphere 30 39 0.009 13.68 1.52
14 0.36 Sphere 30 37 0.007 22.63 3.23
15 0.45 Sphere 36 50 0.014 11.91 0.85
Average 3.96

Droplet
Diameter
[mm]
1 0.37 5.07 125.1 1.49E-06 2.65E-11 53.0 206.7 671.3 224.7
2 0.35 5.96 139.1 1.85E-06 2.24E-11 77.4 110.7 789.1 612.8
3 0.37 3.33 82.1 6.44E-07 2.65E-11 22.9 240.2 440.9 83.6
4 0.7 4.35 203.0 3.93E-06 1.80E-10 20.6 395.4 575.9 45.7
5 1.15 3.58 274.5 7.19E-06 7.96E-10 8.5 399.5 474.0 18.6
6 0.45 6.52 195.6 3.65E-06 4.77E-11 72.1 231.3 863.2 273.2
7 0.43 5.64 161.7 2.49E-06 4.16E-11 56.4 252.4 746.7 195.9
8 0.5 7.56 252.0 6.06E-06 6.54E-11 87.2 236.6 1000.9 323.0
9 0.69 3.90 179.4 3.07E-06 1.72E-10 16.8 369.1 516.4 39.9
10 0.55 4.12 151.1 2.18E-06 8.71E-11 23.5 339.5 545.5 60.7
11 0.45 2.33 69.9 4.66E-07 4.77E-11 9.2 227.9 308.5 35.4
12 0.74 1.39 68.6 4.49E-07 2.12E-10 2.0 166.5 184.0 10.5
13 0.9 1.52 91.2 7.94E-07 3.82E-10 2.0 183.7 201.2 9.5
14 0.36 3.23 77.5 5.73E-07 2.44E-11 22.1 233.9 427.7 82.8
15 0.45 0.85 25.5 6.21E-08 4.77E-11 1.2 102.0 112.5 10.3
70
Trial Number 24
Pressure [KPa] 80

56

Stain #
1 3.31 1.19 21.07 233 89.8 2.44 0.10 49.0
2 2.06 0.74 21.05 297 114.3 2.75 0.11 59.3
3 2.08 0.74 20.84 370 140.8 3.09 0.12 70.6
4 5.36 1.32 14.26 392 99.6 3.89 0.10 49.0
5 2.37 0.47 11.44 502 101.6 4.93 0.10 49.0
6 2.53 0.61 13.95 702 174.4 5.26 0.13 82.9
Average 120.1 3.73 60.0
Error% 39.63 -30.2
71
1 0.46 Sphere 15 16 0.001 6.6 6.60
2 0.69 Sphere 16 18 0.002 12.96 6.48
3 0.55 Sphere 16 18 0.002 11.18 5.59
4 0.45 Non-sphere 16 18 0.002 5.65 2.83
5 0.44 Sphere 19 22 0.003 11.76 3.92
6 0.82 Non-sphere 20 24 0.004 12.42 3.11
7 0.87 Non-sphere 24 27 0.003 11.09 3.70
8 0.83 Non-sphere 24 27 0.003 14.09 4.70
9 0.34 Non-sphere 22 28 0.006 11.57 1.93
10 0.56 Sphere 23 27 0.004 18.51 4.63
11 0.68 Non-sphere 26 29 0.003 12.53 4.18
12 0.64 Sphere 21 26 0.005 8.27 1.65
13 0.78 Sphere 21 27 0.006 10.73 1.79
14 0.56 Sphere 25 28 0.003 11.55 3.85
15 0.47 Sphere 26 29 0.003 9.58 3.19
Average 3.88

Droplet
Diameter
[mm]
1 0.46 6.60 202.4 3.91E-06 5.10E-11 72.2 241.0 873.8 262.6
2 0.69 6.48 298.1 8.48E-06 1.72E-10 46.4 451.3 858.0 90.1
3 0.55 5.59 205.0 4.01E-06 8.71E-11 43.3 360.6 740.1 105.2
4 0.45 2.83 84.9 6.88E-07 4.77E-11 13.6 255.5 374.7 46.7
5 0.44 3.92 115.0 1.26E-06 4.46E-11 26.6 285.9 519.0 81.6
6 0.82 3.11 170.0 2.76E-06 2.89E-10 9.0 332.9 411.8 23.7
7 0.87 3.70 214.6 4.39E-06 3.45E-10 12.0 384.7 489.9 27.3
8 0.83 4.70 260.1 6.45E-06 2.99E-10 20.3 444.4 622.3 40.0
9 0.34 1.93 43.7 1.83E-07 2.06E-11 8.4 181.9 255.5 40.5
10 0.56 4.63 172.9 2.85E-06 9.20E-11 29.2 357.1 613.0 71.7
11 0.68 4.18 189.5 3.43E-06 1.65E-10 19.6 381.6 553.4 45.0
12 0.64 1.65 70.4 4.73E-07 1.37E-10 3.2 190.4 218.5 14.7
13 0.78 1.79 93.1 8.27E-07 2.48E-10 3.1 209.8 237.0 12.9
14 0.56 3.85 143.7 1.97E-06 9.20E-11 20.2 332.7 509.7 53.2
15 0.47 3.19 100.0 9.53E-07 5.44E-11 16.5 277.7 422.4 52.1
72

Bloodstain Pattern Analysis For Determination of Point of Origin - Nima Behrooz

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Bloodstain Pattern Analysis For Determination of Point of Origin - Nima Behrooz

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Bloodstain Pattern Analysis

for Determination of Point of Origin

A thesis submitted in partial fulfilment

BACHELOR OF APPLIED SCIENCE

Supervisor: Professor Sanjeev Chandra

Department of Mechanical and Industrial Engineering

1-2 Point of Origin Determined by Stringing Method............................................ 3

1-3 Well-Formed Stain............................................................................................ 4

1-4 Measuring Method of the Length and Width of a Stain................................... 4

2-1 Schematic Diagram of the Experimental Apparatus......................................... 9

2-2 Technique Used to Measure the Length and Width.......................................... 14

2-3 Technique Used to Measure the Velocity......................................................... 15

3-1 The Stringing Method Applied to Test 4.......................................................... 20

3-2 Detachment Process During the First 40ms...................................................... 23

4-1 Error Associated With Determination of Point of Convergence (Gauge 12)... 27

4-2 Error Associated With Determination of Point of Convergence (Gauge 17)... 28

4-3 Error in Determination of Point of Origin (Gauge 12)..................................... 30

4-4 Error in Determination of Point of Origin (Gauge 17)..................................... 30

4-5 Error Associated with Different Methods to Determine the Height................. 31

4-6 Comparison of Initial Velocity (Gauge 12)...................................................... 32

4-7 Comparison of Initial Velocity (Gauge 17)...................................................... 32

4-8 Percent Error due to Neglecting the Drag Force Effect.................................... 34

B1 Droplet Detachment Process of Test 1 & 4...................................................... 43

B2 Droplet Detachment Process of Test 7 & 10.................................................... 46

B3 Droplet Detachment Process of Test 15 & 18.................................................. 49

L Length or Major Axis of a Stain

W Width or Minor Axis of a Stain

FDrag Drag Force

x0 Initial Horizontal Displacement

v0 y Initial Vertical Velocity

v0 x Initial Horizontal Velocity

Do Suspended Droplet Diameter

N Number of Droplets to Accumulate 2 ml

d minor Suspended Droplet shorter Diameter

d major Suspended Droplet longer Diameter

BPA Blood Pattern Analysis

POC Point of Convergence

stains by serological (such as studying DNA or determining the blood type),

electrophoretic and immunological methods (such as its identification, species

determination). However, a bloodstain pattern analysis (BPA) can have an equivalent

crime participants and witnesses [2].

was MacDonell [3]. He studied bloodstain patterns by performing experiments and

Despite the importance of bloodstain patterns, a lack of understanding can be found in

technique will be explained in detail in the subsequent sections.

if possible provide a more accurate technique to determine the point of origin of a

forces on the motion of blood droplets. To accomplish these objectives, an experimental

apparatus is required to be designed. This apparatus must be capable of generating and

consists of two main tasks which are as follows:

1) Design and fabrication of a blood pattern generator

2) Analysis of bloodstain patterns to complete the objectives

1.3.1 Stringing Method

The point of origin is assumed to be above the point of convergence on the

Hence, the stringing method to determine the height results in an over-estimation.

Figure 1-2 – Point of Origin Determined by Stringing Method

during the analysis are based on this definition [5].

Figure 1-3 – Well-Formed Stain [5]

the measurements, figure 1-4 [5].

If a stain can be considered to be well-formed, it is possible to calculate the impact

known as Balthazard formula:

1Table 1-1 – Different Stain Geometries [6]

calculated using the following equation:

of the object. The Reynolds number for a sphere is defined as: