【作者】 王阳；

【导师】 刘力；

【作者基本信息】 山西医科大学 ， 法医学， 2012， 硕士

【摘要】 目的：利用扫描电镜/x射线能谱仪(SEM/EDX)对锤子打击猪皮和滤纸遗留颗粒进行元素成分分析,探讨：1、锤类工具打击遗留颗粒特征的稳定性；2、不同锤子打击遗留颗粒特征的区别；3、锤子打击滤纸和猪皮遗留颗粒的特征是否一致。为锤类致伤工具的认定建立新的方法。并用该方法对市场常见的20把锤子进行检验,以探讨本法对锤类工具的推断认定能力。方法：用INCA软件Point&ID微区分析功能对1号和3号钢锤锉下的金属渣分别进行检验。每个钢锤检验20个点,对检测结果进行处理分析。用INCA软件Feature and GSR颗粒检验功能对1号和3号钢锤打击滤纸和猪皮所得样品进行检验,每把钢锤打击滤纸和猪皮各9组。检测结果用Microsoft Office Excel2003和SPSS13.0进行处理和分析。用INCA软件Feature and GSR颗粒检验功能对20把锤子打击滤纸所提取样品进行检验,每把锤子提取一个样品。结果：1、通过对1号钢锤分别打击滤纸和猪皮的数据进行分析,9组数据无明显差别,可以认为同一把锤子多次打击遗留颗粒的成分特征是稳定的。2、1号和3号钢锤在锉下金属渣、打击滤纸遗留颗粒、打击猪皮遗留颗粒三类样品的分析结果比较中,均显示出明显的差异性。3、钢锤打击皮肤与打击滤纸所遗留金属颗粒的特征无差异。4、对市售20把锤子打击遗留颗粒进行检验,本方法可以将其分为6个种类,但做不到进一步的区分。结论：1、成分类型不同的锤子在打击物体时遗留的颗粒也不同,遗留颗粒的成分特征与打击使用锤子的成分特征一致,通过对遗留颗粒的检验可以对成分类型不同的锤子做出推断认定。2、锤子打击滤纸和打击猪皮所遗留颗粒的特征是相同的,可以通过对打击滤纸遗留颗粒的检验来反映打击皮肤遗留颗粒的特征。3、目前本方法只能对锤子进行种类认定,尚不能做出个体认定。更多还原

【Abstract】 Objective:The component of legacy particles which from hacking of hammers on filter paper and skin of a pig is analyzed by SEM/EDX. Anew method of estimation and identification of the instrument causing the trauma is created through discussing three problems.1. How about the stability of legacy particles from hacking of hammers.2. Is there a difference in the legacy particles from different hammers?3. Whether the legacy particles from hacking of hammers on filter paper are same as from skin of a pig or not. Twenty hammers were analyzed through this method, to discuss the capability of the method to estimation and identification of the instrument causing the trauma.Methods:Metal grain from hammer No.1and No.3is analyzed by program Point&ID. Twenty points in each sample. Then the results are analyzed.Samples are created through two hammers (No.1and No.3) hacking filter paper and skin of a pig,9groups in each hacking. Then the samples are analyzed by program Feature and GSR. The results are analyzed by Microsoft Office Excel2003and SPSS13.0.Twenty samples are created through twenty different hammers hacking filter paper. Then the samples are analyzed by program Feature and GSR.Results:1.To analyze the results by hammer No.1hacking filter paper and skin of a pig. There is no difference in nine groups of data. It can infer that features of legacy particles by one hammer hacking several times are stable.2. There are differences between the results of metal grain, legacy particles by hacking on filter paper and legacy particles by hacking on skin of a pig from hammers No.1and No.3.3. There is no difference between the legacy particles by hacking of a hammer on filter paper and skin of a pig.4. This method can divided twenty hammers into six groups by analyzing the legacy particles. But it can’t be identified more subtle.Conclusions:1.The legacy particles is different when the particles from different hammers. The features of legacy particles is same as the hammer which be used to hack. It can be identified of different hammers through analyzing legacy particles from hacking of hammers.2. There is no difference between legacy particles from hacking of hammers on filter paper and skin of a pig. The features of legacy particles from hacking on filter paper can reflect the features of legacy particles from hacking on the human body. 3. This method can classify hammers into groups. But hammers can’t be individual identified through this method.更多还原