OSAC 2023-N-0010 Standard Practice for a 

Physical Fit Analysis Training Program 

1 

OSAC 2023-N-0011 

Standard Practice for a Physical Fit 

Analysis Training Program 

Trace Materials Subcommittee 

Chemistry: Trace Evidence Scientific Area Committee 

Organization of Scientific Area Committees (OSAC) for Forensic Science 
OSAC 2023-N-0011, Standard Practice for a 

Physical Fit Analysis Training Program

2 

OSAC Proposed Standard 

OSAC 2023-N-0011 

Standard Practice for a Physical Fit 

Analysis Training Program 

Prepared by 

Trace Materials Subcommittee 

Version: 2.0 

November 2023 

Disclaimer: 

This OSAC Proposed Standard was written by the Organization of Scientific Area Committees (OSAC) for 

Forensic Science following a process that includes an open comment period. This Proposed Standard will 

be submitted to a standard developing organization and is subject to change. 

There may be references in an OSAC Proposed Standard to other publications under development by 

OSAC. The information in the Proposed Standard, and underlying concepts and methodologies, may be 

used by the forensic-science community before the completion of such companion publications. 

Any identification of commercial equipment, instruments, or materials in the Proposed Standard is not a 

recommendation or endorsement by the U.S. Government and does not imply that the equipment, 

instruments, or materials are necessarily the best available for the purpose. 

Keywords: forensic science; training; physical fit; physical fit analysis; trace; materials 

 
OSAC 2023-N-0011, Standard Practice for a 

Physical Fit Analysis Training Program

3 

Table of Contents 

1 Scope ....................................................................................................................................... 4

2 Referenced Documents ............................................................................................................ 5

3 Significance and Use ............................................................................................................... 5

4 Responsibilities ........................................................................................................................ 6

5 Syllabus ................................................................................................................................... 7

6 Physical Fit Training Program Objectives ............................................................................... 8

Appendix: Reading Assignments .................................................................................................. 16

 
OSAC 2023-N-0011, Standard Practice for a 

Physical Fit Analysis Training Program

4 

Standard Practice for a Physical Fit Analysis Training Program 

1 Scope 

1.1 This practice is for use by laboratory personnel responsible for designing a training 

program for forensic science practitioners (FSPs) who will perform physical fit examinations on 

various materials. 

1.1.1 The trainees and training program shall meet or exceed the minimum training requirements 

set forth in E2917, WK84047, and WK84882. 

1.1.2 Additional training could be required for a particular technique or equipment (e.g. 

photography) referred to herein as technique. The application of analytical techniques to physical 

fit analysis assumes the trainee is already competent in the use of each particular analytical 

technique. 

1.1.3 Other sources of information on physical fit examination not specifically mentioned in this 

document can be considered and added. 

1.1.4 Additional physical fit analysis training beyond that which is listed here should be made 

available to the trainee. Such training could include off-site courses, internships, and specialized 

training by experienced FSPs. 

1.1.5 Continuing education and training is recommended. Additional training provides a FSP 

with the opportunity to remain current in the field. 

1.2 This practice is in a modular format for easy adaptation to an individual laboratory’s 

training program. Recommendations as to lessons, practical exercises, progress monitoring, and 

trainee evaluations are included. Reading assignments with full citations are listed for each 

subsequent section in the appendix of this document. 
OSAC 2023-N-0011, Standard Practice for a 

Physical Fit Analysis Training Program

5 

1.3 This standard practice does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, 

associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate 

safety and health practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use. 

2 Referenced Documents 

2.1 ASTM Standards 

2.1.1 E620 Practice for Reporting Opinions of Scientific of Technical Experts 

2.1.2 E2917 Practice for Forensic Scientist Practitioner Training, Continuing Education, and 

Professional Development Programs 

2.1.3 E1459 Guide for Physical Evidence Labeling and Related Documentation 

2.1.4 E1492 Practice for Receiving, Documenting, Storing and Retrieving Evidence in a 

Forensic Science Laboratory 

2.1.5 WK84047 Guide for Physical Fit Examination 

2.1.6 WK84882 Guide for Testimony for Forensic Science Practitioners 

3 Significance and Use 

3.1 The procedures outlined herein are grounded in the generally accepted body of knowledge 

and experience in the field of forensic physical fit examination and comparison. 

3.2 A physical fit analysis training program provides a theoretical foundation and basic 

practical skills necessary to prepare a trainee to become a qualified physical fit FSP. Upon 

successful completion of the physical fit analysis training program, the trainee is able to form 

opinions based upon sound scientific knowledge, appropriate examinations, and practical 

experience with various materials. The trainee also is able to independently work cases, write 

reports, testify in court, and technically review cases. Upon completion of the program by a trainee 
OSAC 2023-N-0011, Standard Practice for a 

Physical Fit Analysis Training Program

6 

or at some regular interval (e.g., once per accreditation cycle), the training program should be 

evaluated for its efficacy and relevance according to the guidance set forth in E2917. 

3.3 This training practice covers the use of a variety of microscopes and photography 

techniques which can be utilized in the analysis of physical fits. A laboratory may not have access 

to all of the listed equipment. It is expected that a physical fit analysis training program will include 

all of the techniques that are found within a laboratory’s procedures for the examination of physical 

fits. 

4 Responsibilities 

4.1 Each trainee is trained by, and works under the guidance of, one or more qualified physical 

fit FSPs. 

4.2 The trainer(s) shall be technically qualified in physical fit examination and comparison. 

Other members of the laboratory are encouraged to offer relevant information regarding their 

specialties to the trainee. The trainer(s) is responsible for: 

4.2.1 Introducing the trainee to the relevant scientific literature, appropriate procedures, training 

material, and reference collections. 

4.2.2 Discussing readings and theory with the trainee. 

4.2.3 Teaching basic microscopy and photography for physical fit examinations. 

4.2.4 Teaching case management. 

4.2.5 Fostering ethical professional conduct. 

4.2.6 Reviewing how the different types of human factors (e.g., bias, visual perception issues, 

logical inferential reasoning, stress and cognitive loads) can influence physical fit examinations, 

by providing examples to illustrate the concepts. 

4.2.7 Teaching appropriate quality assurance and quality control procedures. 
OSAC 2023-N-0011, Standard Practice for a 

Physical Fit Analysis Training Program

7 

4.2.8 Reviewing test, practical exercises, and casework samples with trainee. 

4.2.9 Teaching expert testimony skills through mock court and/or observation. 

4.2.10 Monitoring and evaluating the trainee’s progress. 

4.3 Each laboratory is required to maintain: 

4.3.1 An up-to-date training program which is reviewed and assessed for efficacy and relevance 

as described in E2917. 

4.3.2 Documentation of training according to E2917. 

4.3.3 Documentation of competency tests and proficiency tests. 

5 Syllabus 

5.1 A physical fit analysis training program provides the trainee theoretical knowledge and 

practical skills in examining, interpreting, reporting, verifying, testifying, and technically 

reviewing forensic physical fit cases. This is accomplished through a combination of the following 

training methods: 

5.1.1 Reading of relevant literature 

5.1.1.1 The reading assignments listed are suggestions. Newer versions can be used. Other relevant 

literature can be used or substituted. 

5.1.2 Instruction by, and observation of, physical fit FSP 

5.1.2.1 Lectures and discussions 

5.1.2.2 Practical demonstration of basic skills 

5.1.2.3 Casework, including report writing and technical review 

5.1.2.4 Court testimony 

5.1.3 Practical skills 

5.1.3.1 Practical exercises which include analysis of reference materials and known samples 
OSAC 2023-N-0011, Standard Practice for a 

Physical Fit Analysis Training Program

8 

5.1.4 Final competency evaluations 

5.1.4.1 Written or oral tests 

5.1.4.2 Practical laboratory tests 

5.1.4.3 Mock cases 

5.1.4.4 Mock court or oral exam 

5.1.5 Performing supervised casework 

5.2 The recommended training period is between one and three months, full time, for a FSP 

that has been previously trained and is competent in the analytical techniques utilized in the 

analysis of physical fits. For a new FSP with no previous training in microscopical techniques or 

photography, the expected training period is between three and six months. 

5.3 Successful completion of each milestone in the training program will be recorded using the 

guidance set forth in E2917. 

6 Physical Fit Training Program Objectives 

6.1 Encouraging Physical Fit Evidence 

6.1.1 This section introduces the trainee to the types of cases and the various conditions in which 

evidence can be encountered for a physical fit examination. 

6.1.1.1 There is no limit as to the type of material that can be encountered for a physical fit 

examination. Physical fits have been completed on many different types of materials, including, 

but not limited to, matches, metal, paint, paper, plastic, skeletal material, tape, textiles, and wood. 

This training document provides an overall training procedure for physical fit examination. Special 

considerations for specific materials are addressed in WK84047 and in the Appendix. 

6.1.1.2 The trainee should observe an experienced FSP perform physical fit casework throughout 

the training program. 
OSAC 2023-N-0011, Standard Practice for a 

Physical Fit Analysis Training Program

9 

6.1.2 This section also introduces the trainee to sample handling and general considerations 

when examining evidence for physical fit. 

6.1.3 Reading Assignments – see Appendix

6.1.4 Practical Exercise 

6.1.4.1 Demonstrate knowledge of the types of cases in which a physical fit examination could be 

warranted. 

6.1.4.2 Demonstrate knowledge of the precautions necessary when dealing with evidence for 

physical fit examinations. 

6.1.4.3 Discuss how evidence relates to other sections within the laboratory (e.g., DNA, friction 

ridge). 

6.1.5 The methods of instruction for this unit are reading and research by the trainee and 

discussions with the trainer(s). 

6.1.6 The method of evaluation for this unit is an assessment of the trainee’s completed exercises 

by the trainer. 

6.2 Physical Fit Terminology 

6.2.1 This section introduces the trainee to the following terms: 

6.2.1.1 amorphous 

6.2.1.2 brittle 

6.2.1.3 class characteristic 

6.2.1.4 contour 

6.2.1.5 crystalline 

6.2.1.6 cut 

6.2.1.7 deformation 

6.2.1.8 ductile 

6.2.1.9 elastic 

6.2.1.10 fibrous 

6.2.1.11 fracture 

6.2.1.12 individual characteristic 
OSAC 2023-N-0011, Standard Practice for a 

Physical Fit Analysis Training Program

10 

6.2.1.13 macroscopic 

6.2.1.14 malleable 

6.2.1.15 microscopic 

6.2.1.16 morphology 

6.2.1.17 physical fit 

6.2.1.18 pliable 

6.2.1.19 polymeric 

6.2.1.20 rigid 

6.2.1.21 stress 

6.2.1.22 strain 

6.2.1.23 torn 

6.2.2 Reading Assignments – see Appendix

6.2.3 Practical Exercise 

6.2.3.1 Define the terms listed in this section in the context of physical fit examinations. 

6.2.4 The methods of instruction for this unit are reading and research by the trainee. 

6.2.5 The method of evaluation for this unit is an oral or written quiz. 

6.3 Characteristics of Materials and Suitability for Physical Fit Examinations 

6.3.1 This section introduces the trainee to the evaluation of physical fit evidence using the 

laboratory’s standard methods and protocols. 

6.3.2 The methods of instruction for this unit are reading by the trainee, lecture from the trainer, 

and practical exercises. 

6.3.3 Reading Assignments – see Appendix

6.3.4 Lecture and Practical Exercise 

6.3.4.1 Discuss class and individual characteristics for various materials. 

6.3.4.2 Discuss suitability (i.e., what makes an item(s) suitable for physical fit examination). 

6.3.4.3 Review the use of available laboratory equipment (e.g., lighted magnifier, 

stereomicroscope, comparison microscope) and application to physical fit analysis. 
OSAC 2023-N-0011, Standard Practice for a 

Physical Fit Analysis Training Program

11 

6.3.4.4 Review the different observation and detail reproduction techniques (e.g., reverse lighting, 

polarizing films, casting) as they apply to physical fit analysis. 

6.3.4.5 Collect different types of materials that possess different physical qualities (e.g., 

crystalline, amorphous, fibrous, composite, rigid, pliable). Separate these samples into two or more 

pieces using various techniques (e.g., cutting, tearing, breaking). The trainer should include 

materials that are both suitable and not suitable for physical fit examination. 

 Observe the edge features of the different materials to include class characteristics (e.g., size, 

color, pattern, surface texture, dimension, composition) and individual characteristics that 

could be visible macroscopically (e.g., large incidental striations/scratches; irregular fracture 

edges; unusual identifiers such as dirt, marker, paint, smudge, or smear traversing a separation 

boundary; a break through the design or wording imprinted on the object). 

 Examine the items for the presence of individual characteristics that could be visible 

microscopically (e.g., cross-sectional topography; small incidental striations/scratches; 

irregular fracture edges; inclusions; stress fracture lines; extrusion markings; conchoidal stress 

lines; hackle marks; and unusual identifiers such as dirt, marker, paint, smudges, or smears 

traversing a separation boundary; a break through the design or wording imprinted in the 

object) in the previously separated materials. 

 For each type of material, assess its suitability to form a physical fit evaluating class 

characteristics and edge features including distortion. 

6.3.4.6 Separate or break multiple similar objects (e.g., tape, pencils) to observe how each 

individual unit separates/breaks differently. Attempt physical fits among the separated pieces. 

6.3.4.7 Reconstruct a broken object that has been separated into multiple pieces (e.g., tail light 

lens). 
OSAC 2023-N-0011, Standard Practice for a 

Physical Fit Analysis Training Program

12 

6.3.5 The method of evaluation for this unit is an assessment during the oral discussions of the 

practical exercises. 

6.4 Documentation 

6.4.1 This section introduces the trainee to documenting a physical fit, including note taking and 

photography. 

6.4.2 Reading Assignment – see Appendix

6.4.3 Practical Exercise 

6.4.3.1 Photograph numerous physical fits, including items with features that can only be viewed 

under a microscope. 

6.4.3.2 Photograph case materials. 

6.4.3.3 Review previous case notes, verifications, and documentation provided by the trainer. 

6.4.3.4 Take notes on a mock case(s). 

6.4.4 The methods of instruction for this unit are reading by the trainee, lecture from the trainer, 

and practical exercises. 

6.4.5 The method of evaluation for this unit is an assessment of the practical exercises. 

6.5 Examination and Comparison of Evidence for Physical Fit 

6.5.1 This section introduces the trainee to the observation and comparison of separated 

materials. 

6.5.2 The methods of instruction for this unit are reading by the trainee, lecture from the trainer, 

and practical exercises. 

6.5.3 Reading Assignment – see Appendix

6.5.4 Lecture and Practical Exercises 
OSAC 2023-N-0011, Standard Practice for a 

Physical Fit Analysis Training Program

13 

6.5.4.1 Discuss the scientific basis of current guidelines for interpretation and results of a physical 

fit examination. 

6.5.4.2 Discuss error rates and existing validation studies. 

6.5.4.3 Discuss how different types of human factors (e.g., bias, visual perception issues, logical 

inferential reasoning, stress, and cognitive loads) can influence physical fit examinations and what 

tools can be used to mitigate or resolve human factors issues. 

6.5.4.4 Complete mock cases that encompass a variety of materials that could be encountered in 

casework. 

6.5.4.5 Complete mock cases that have physical fit and no physical fit results. 

6.5.4.6 Discuss the verification process. 

6.5.4.7 Complete several of these mock cases with full documentation including photography. See 

section 6.4 regarding documentation. 

6.5.5 The method of evaluation for this unit is an assessment of the practical exercises. 

6.6 Report Writing 

6.6.1 This section introduces the trainee to writing technically and administratively accurate 

reports for physical fit examinations. 

6.6.2 Reading Assignments – see Appendix

6.6.3 Practical Exercise 

6.6.3.1 Write reports for the previously completed mock cases in 6.5. 

6.6.4 The methods of instruction for this unit are a lecture from the trainer and reading completed 

technically reviewed reports. 

6.6.5 The method of evaluation for this unit is a review of the reports written by the trainee. 

6.7 Testimony 
OSAC 2023-N-0011, Standard Practice for a 

Physical Fit Analysis Training Program

14 

6.7.1 This section introduces the trainee to testimony in forensic physical fit analysis. 

6.7.2 Reading Assignments – see Appendix

6.7.3 Practical Exercises 

6.7.3.1 Review and discuss with trainer summaries of prominent court rulings dealing with 

forensic science including ethics, Brady issues, confrontation clause, admissibility, and discovery. 

6.7.3.2 Prepare lists of suggested qualifying and educational questions, with related answers, for 

the court. 

6.7.3.3 Review the relevant materials for an admissibility hearing to include research, theory, and 

legal decisions regarding physical fit casework. 

6.7.4 The methods of instruction for this unit are a lecture from the trainer and witnessing or 

reviewing transcripts of court testimony given by a FSP (if available). 

6.7.5 The method of evaluation for this unit is a review of the court documents prepared by the 

trainee. 

6.8 Final Training Evaluations 

6.8.1 This section evaluates the knowledge, skills, and abilities of the trainee through a 

combination of the following assessment elements: 

6.8.1.1 Complete a final comprehensive written or oral examination on physical fit examinations. 

6.8.1.2 Conduct mock case(s) for competency evaluation. 

6.8.1.3 Participate in a mock trial using one of the mock cases completed during training. If the 

trainee has previous mock trial or court experience, an oral review could replace the mock trial. 

6.8.2 The method of evaluation for this unit is successful completion of the selected elements of 

assessment. 

6.9 Technical Reviews and Verification 
OSAC 2023-N-0011, Standard Practice for a 

Physical Fit Analysis Training Program

15 

6.9.1 This section introduces the trainee to technical and administrative reviews. 

6.9.2 Practical Exercises: 

6.9.2.1 Observe an experienced FSP’s casework that has been technically reviewed. 

6.9.2.2 Complete mock technical review and mock verification exercises. 

6.9.3 The methods of instruction for this unit are demonstrations by the trainer and discussions 

with the trainee. 

6.9.4 The method of evaluation for this unit is successful completed of the practical exercises. 

6.10 Supervised Casework 

6.10.1 This section introduces the trainee to performing casework. 

6.10.2 Practical Exercises: 

6.10.2.1 Perform actual casework under the supervision of a qualified FSP before 

performing independent casework. 

6.10.3 The methods of instruction for this unit are demonstrations by the trainer and discussions 

with the trainee. 

6.10.4 The methods of evaluation for this unit are assessment of the casework completed by the 

trainee. 
OSAC 2023-N-0011, Standard Practice for a 

Physical Fit Analysis Training Program

16 

Appendix: Reading Assignments 

1. Section 6.1 Encountering Physical Fit Evidence 

1.1. WK84047 Standard Guide for Physical Fit Examination 

1.2. Brooks et al. Forensic physical fits in the trace evidence discipline: A review. Forensic 

Science International 313 (2020). 

1.3. Cortner G, Hammam J. Physical Match: A Focus on its Forensic Use. Tieline. 1996, 32 - 

49. 

1.4. Jayaprakash P. Practical relevance of pattern uniqueness in Forensic Science, Forensic 

Science International 231, 2013. 

2. Section 6.2 Physical Fit Terminology

2.1. Kirk PL. Crime Scene Investigation, 2nd ed. John Wiley and Sons: New York, 1974, pp. 

240-243, 260-263, 269-271. 

2.2. DeForest PR, Gaensslen RE, Lee HC. Forensic Science: An Introduction to Criminalistics. 

New York: McGraw-Hill, Inc., 1983. pp. 51-52, 162-164, 173-174, 215-218, 280-289, 292-

293. 

2.3. Saferstein R, Ed., Forensic Science Handbook, Prentice-Hall, Inc., New York, NY, 1982, 

pp. 151, 547. 

2.4. Saferstein R. Criminalistics: An Introduction to Forensic Science, 5th ed., Prentice-Hall, 

Inc., Englewood Cliffs, NJ, 1977, pp. 61-71. 

3. Section 6.3 Characteristics of materials and suitability for physical fit examinations 

(General)

3.1. Laboratory specific procedures 

3.2. Bentley S. The Use of Mikrosil as an Aid in Confirming a Physical Match Between Two 

Pieces of Glass, Tieline, 12, No. 1 (Summer 1987). 

3.3. Claytor LK, Davis AL. A Validation of Fracture Matching Through the Microscopic 

Examination of the Fractured Surfaces of Hacksaw Blades. AFTE Journal 2010, Vol 42 

(4), pp 323 - 334. 

3.4. Dawood B, et al. Quantitative matching of forensic evidence fragments utilizing 3D 

microscopy analysis of fracture surface replicas. J For Sci 2022, Vol 67 (3), pp 899 - 910. 

3.5. Finkelstein NS, Levy O, Levi A. Photographic comparison of surface topography as a 

viable solution when physical match is challenging. J For Sci Vol 66, No 1, pp 295-302. 

3.6. Orench JA. A Validation Study of Fracture Matching Metal Specimens Failed in Tension. 

AFTE Journal 2005; 37 (2)pp 142 - 145. 

3.7. Prusinowski M, Brooks E, Neumann C, Trejos T. Forensic interlaboratory evaluations of a 

systematic method for examining, documenting, and interpreting duct tape physical fits. 

Forensic Chemistry. 2023. 34, 100407. 
OSAC 2023-N-0011, Standard Practice for a 

Physical Fit Analysis Training Program

17 

3.8. van Dijk CD, van Someren A, Visser R, Sjerps M. Evidential value of duct tape 

comparison using loopbreaking patterns. Forensic Sci Int. 2022 Mar; 332:111178. 

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.forsciint.2022.111178

4. Section 6.3 Characteristics of materials and suitability for physical fit examinations 

(Glass)

4.1. ASTM C1256-93(2019), Standard Practice for Interpreting Glass Fracture Surface 

Features, ASTM International, West Conshohocken, PA, 2019, www.astm.org

4.2. Baca AC, Thornton JI, and Tulleners FA. Determination of Fracture Patterns in Glass and 

Glassy Polymers, J For Sci, 2016, 61, pp 92-101 

4.3. McJunkins S, Thornton J. Glass Fracture Analysis. A Review. Forensic Science, 2 (1973) 

pp 1 – 27. 

4.4. Miller ET. Forensic Glass Comparisons in Saferstein R, editor. Forensic Science 

Handbook Vol 1 1st ed. pp 151-153. 

4.5. Nelson DF. Illustrating the Fit of Glass Fragments. Journal of Criminal Law, Criminology 

and Police Science 1959. pp 312-314. 

4.6. Quinn GD. Fractography of Ceramics and Glasses. National Institute of Standards and 

Technology. (2020). https://doi.org/10.6028/NIST.SP.960-16e3

4.7. Tulleners F, Thornton J, Baca, A. Determination of Unique Fracture Patterns in Glass and 

Glassy Polymers. Department of Justice, March 2013. pp. 2-13.

https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/grants/241445.pdf

4.8. Watch video on how flat glass is made such as 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OVokYKqWRZE 

5. Section 6.3 Characteristics of materials and suitability for physical fit examinations 

(Matches)

5.1. Dixon K. Positive Identification of Torn Burned Matches with Emphasis on Crosscut and 

Torn Fiber Comparisons. J For Sci 1983; 28 (2) pp 351-359. 

5.2. Funk HJ. Comparison of Paper Matches. J For Sci 1967; 13 (1) pp 137 – 143. 

5.3. Gerhart FJ, Ward DC. Paper Match Comparisons by Submersion. J For Sci 1986; 31 (4) 

pp 1450 – 1454. 

5.4. Von Bremen UG. Laser Excited Luminescence of Inclusions and Fibers in Paper Matches. 

J For Sci 1986; 31 (2) pp 455-463. 

6. Section 6.3 Characteristics of materials and suitability for physical fit examinations 

(Miscellaneous)

6.1. Bisbing R, et al. A Fingernail Identification. AFTE Journal 1980; 12(1) pp. 27- 28. 

6.2. Christophe DP, Daniels C. An Unusual Technique for Physical Match Comparison. AFTE 

Journal 2008, Vol 40 (4), pp 396 - 398. 

6.3. Gerber KA. A Sawed-off Shotgun Barrel Identified by Random Marks Produced from 

Usage. ATF Journal 2005. Vol 37 (2) pp 123 - 126. 
OSAC 2023-N-0011, Standard Practice for a 

Physical Fit Analysis Training Program

18 

6.4. Matricardi VR, et al. The Comparison of Broken Surfaces: A Scanning Electron 

Microscopy Study. J For Sci 1975: 20 (3) pp 507. 

6.5. Miller J, Kong H. Metal Fractures: Matching and Non-matching Patterns. AFTE Journal

2006; 38(2). 

6.6. Perper J, Prichard W, McCommons P. Matching the Lost Skin of Homicide Suspect. For 

Sci International 1985; 29 pp 77-82. 

6.7. Shor Y, et al. Physical Match: Insole and Shoe. J For Sci July 2003, Vol 48, No 4. 

6.8. Walsh K, Gordon A. Pattern Matching of a Paint Flake to its Source. AFTE Journal 2001; 

33(2) pp.143-145. 

7. Section 6.3 Characteristics of materials and suitability for physical fit examinations 

(Synthetic polymers)

7.1. Castle DA, Gibbons B, Hamer PS. Physical Methods for Examining and Comparing 

Transparent Plastic Bags and Cling Films, J For Sci Society, 1994, 34 (1): 61-68. 

7.2. Ford KN. The Physical Comparison of Polyethylene Film. J For Sci Society 1975; 15 pp 

107-113. 

7.3. Kopec R, Meyers C. Comparative Analysis of Trash Bags – A Case History. AFTE 

Journal 1980; 12(1) pp 23 - 25. 

7.4. Pierce DS. Identifiable Markings on Plastics. J For Identification 1990; 40 (2) pp 51-59. 

7.5. Vanderkolk JR. Identifying Consecutively Made Garbage Bags Through Manufactured 

Characteristics. J For Ident 1995; 45(1) pp 38 – 50. 

7.6. Von Bremen UG, Blunt LKR. Physical Comparison of Plastic Garbage Bags and 

Sandwich Bags. J For Sci 1983; 28 (3) pp 644-654. 

7.7. Van Hoven HA, Fraysier HD. The Matching of Automotive Paint Chips by Surface 

Striation Alignment. J For Sci 28.2 (1983): 463-67. 

7.8. Walsh K, Gordon A. Pattern matching of a paint flake to its source. AFTE Journal 2001; 

33(2) pp.143-5. 

7.9. Zugibe F, Costello J. The Jigsaw Puzzle Identification of a Hit and Run Automobile, J For

Sci 31.1 (1986) 329 – 32. 

7.10. Watch videos on how different synthetic polymer objects are made such as: 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7O29V_fDdbQ

8. Section 6.3 Characteristics of materials and suitability for physical fit examinations 

(Skeletal materials)

8.1. Christensen AM, Isa MI, Smith MA, Hefner JT, Berryman HE, Saginor IS, NS and Webb 

JB. (2022). A Guide to Forensic Fractography of Bone (1.0). Zenodo. 

https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.6013748. 

8.2. Christensen A, Sylvester A. Physical Matches of Bone, Shell and Tooth Fragments: A 

Validation Study. J For Sci 2008; 53(3) pp. 694 – 698. 

8.3. Villa P, Mahieu E. Breakage patterns of human long bones. J Hum Evol 1991; 21 pp. 27–

48. 
OSAC 2023-N-0011, Standard Practice for a 

Physical Fit Analysis Training Program

19 

9. Section 6.3 Characteristics of materials and suitability for physical fit examinations 

(Tape)

9.1. Agron N, Schecter B. Physical Comparisons and Some Characteristics of Electrical Tape. 

AFTE Journal 1986; 18 (3) pp 53 – 59. 

9.2. Bradley M. A Validation Study for Duct Tape End Matches. J For Sci 2006;51(3) pp 504-

508. 

9.3. Bradley M. A Validation Study for Vinyl Electrical Tape End Matches. J For Sci 2011; 

56(3) pp 606-611. 

9.4. Prusinowski M, Andrews Z, Neumann C, Trejos T. Assessing significant factors that can 

influence physical fit examinations – Part I. Physical fits of torn and cut duct tapes. For. 

Sci. Int. 2023, 343, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.forsciint.2023.111567

9.5. Prusinowski M, Brooks E, Trejos T. Development and validation of a systematic approach 

for the quantitative assessment of the quality of duct tape physical fits. Forensic Science 

International, 307, February 2020, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.forsciint.2019.110103

9.6. Prusinowski M, Brooks E, Neumann C, Trejos T. Forensic interlaboratory evaluations of a 

systematic method for examining, documenting, and interpreting duct tape physical fits. 

Forensic Chemistry. 2023. 34, 100407. 

9.7. Spaulding JS, Picconatto GM. Characterization of fracture match associations with 

automated image processing. For Sci Int 2023; 342. 

9.8. Tulleners F, Braun J. The Statistical Evaluation of Torn and Cut Duct Tape Physical End 

Matching. National Institute of Justice 2011; Jul. Report No. 235287 

9.9. van Dijk CD, van Someren A, Visser R, Sjerps M. Evidential value of duct tape 

comparison using loop breaking patterns. Forensic Sci Int. 2022 Mar; 332:111178. 

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.forsciint.2022.111178

9.10. Weimar B. Physical match examination of the joint faces of adhesive PVC-tapes. AFTE 

Journal 2010;42(3) pp. 271-7. 

9.11. Weimar B. Physical Match Examination of Adhesive PVC-Tapes: Improvement of the 

Conclusiveness by Heat Treatment. AFTE Journal 2008; 40(3) pp. 300-302. 

9.12. Watch videos on how tape is made such as: 

9.12.1.https://electrictv.net/videos/3m-tape-manufacturer-how-its-made-necaibew-team/ 

9.12.2.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fVpNteozrO0

10. Section 6.3 Characteristics of materials and suitability for physical fit examinations 

(Textiles)

10.1. Fisher BAJ, Svensson A, Wendel O. Techniques of Crime Scene Investigation, 4th ed., 

Elsevier Science Publishing Co., Inc., New York, NY, 1987. 

10.2. Kirk PL. Crime Investigation. New York: Interscience Publishers, Inc., 1966. pp. 116-125. 

10.3. Laux D. Identification of a Rope by Means of a Physical Match Between the Cut Ends. J 

For Sci 1984; 29 (4) pp.1247 – 1248. 
OSAC 2023-N-0011, Standard Practice for a 

Physical Fit Analysis Training Program

20 

11. Section 6.4 Documentation

11.1. E1459 Standard Guide for Physical Evidence Labeling and Related Documentation 

11.2. E1492 Standard Practice for Receiving, Documenting, Storing and Retrieving Evidence in 

a Forensic Science Laboratory 

11.3. Digital camera manual appropriate to camera 

11.4. Laboratory specific procedure(s) on documentation 

 

12. Section 6.5 Examination and comparison of evidence for physical fit

12.1. WK84047 Standard Guide for Physical Fit Examination 

12.2. Budowle B et al. A Perspective on Errors, Bias, and Interpretation in the Forensic Sciences 

and Direction for Continuing Advancement. J For Sci, July 2009, Vol. 54, No. 4, pp. 798 

- 809. 

12.3. Dror IE. Cognitive and Human Factors in Expert Decision Making: Six Fallacies and the 

Eight Sources of Bias. Anal Chem, 2020, 92, pp. 7998 - 8004. 

12.4. Katterwe H. Fracture Matching and Repetitive Experiments: A Contribution of Validation. 

AFTE Journal 2005; 37 (3) pp. 229 – 241. 

12.5. Quigley-McBride A et al. A practical tool for information management in forensic 

decisions: User Linear Sequential Unmasking - Expanded (LSU-E) in casework. 

Forensic Science International: Synergy, 4, e100216. 

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fsisyn.2022.100216. 

12.6. Spellman BA, Eldridge H, Bieber P. Challenges to reasoning in forensic science decisions. 

For Sci International: Synergy, 4, e100200. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fsisyn.2021.100200. 

12.7. Stone R. A Probabilistic Model of Fractures in Brittle Metals. AFTE Journal 2004; 36 (4) 

pp. 297- 301. 

12.8. Tsach T, Wiesner S, Shor Y. Empirical Proof of Physical Match: Systematic Research with 

Tensile Machine. For Sci Int 2007; 166 pp.77-83. 

12.9. Yekutieli Y, Shor Y, Wiesner S, Tsach T. Physical Matching Verification. Department of 

Justice, December 2012 http://www.crime-sceneinvestigator.net/PhysicalMatchingVerification.pdf. 

12.10. OSAC 2022-S-0029 Standard Guide for Interpretation and Reporting in Forensic 

Comparisons of Trace Materials 

13. Section 6.6 Report Writing

13.1. OSAC 2022-S-0029 Standard Guide for Interpretation and Reporting in Forensic 

Comparisons of Trace Materials 

13.2. Laboratory specific physical fit analysis procedure(s) on reporting. 

14. Section 6.7 Testimony

14.1. Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals (92-102), 509 U.S. 579 (1993) 

14.2. Frye v. United States 293 F. 1013 (D.C. Cir. 1923) 

14.3. Kumho Tire Co. v. Carmichael 526 US 137 (1999) 
OSAC 2023-N-0011, Standard Practice for a 

Physical Fit Analysis Training Program

21 

14.4. Melendez-Diaz v. Massachusetts 557 US 305 (2009) 

14.5. Bullcoming v. New Mexico 564 US 647 (2011) 

14.6. Williams v. Illinois 567 US 50 (2012) 

14.7. Brady vs Maryland 373 US 83 (1963)