1. Glass fragments from portable electronic devices: Implications for forensic examinations 
Kelsey E. Seyfang, Kahlee E. Redman, Rachel S. Popelka-Filcoff, K. Paul Kirkbride 
Forensic Science International 
Volume 257, Pages (December 2015)
DOI: /j.forsciint
Copyright © 2015 Elsevier Ireland Ltd Terms and Conditions

2. Fig. 1
Refractive index frequency distribution for PED glass examined in this study compared to refractive index frequency distribution for glass in the South Australia regional forensic laboratory database the (n=2775).
Forensic Science International  , DOI: ( /j.forsciint )
Copyright © 2015 Elsevier Ireland Ltd Terms and Conditions

3. Fig. 2
Comparison of surface and bulk refractive indices of OEM PED glass samples labelled as: model; generation; instance (where multiple samples of the same generation were obtained). Confidence intervals are 99%.
Forensic Science International  , DOI: ( /j.forsciint )
Copyright © 2015 Elsevier Ireland Ltd Terms and Conditions

4. Fig. 3
Comparison of surface and bulk refractive index frequency distributions of PED glass (indicated as tempered surface and tempered bulk, respectively) with refractive index frequency distribution for glass in the South Australia regional forensic laboratory database the (n=2775).
Forensic Science International  , DOI: ( /j.forsciint )
Copyright © 2015 Elsevier Ireland Ltd Terms and Conditions

5. Fig. 4
Relationship between OEM PED glass refractive index with 99% confidence intervals and year of manufacture, showing that the RI of the glass is heavily dependent on when the glass was produced and that the RI of the glass generally has decreased over time.
Forensic Science International  , DOI: ( /j.forsciint )
Copyright © 2015 Elsevier Ireland Ltd Terms and Conditions

6. Fig. 5
SEM–EDS results for typical soda-lime replacement glass (red trace), OEM PED glass surface (green trace), and OEM PED glass interior (blue trace). (For interpretation of the references to color in this figure legend, the reader is referred to the web version of this article.)
Forensic Science International  , DOI: ( /j.forsciint )
Copyright © 2015 Elsevier Ireland Ltd Terms and Conditions

7. Fig. 6
SEM–EDS elemental linescan across the edges of cross-sections of soda-lime replacement glass (bottom) and OEM PED glass (top); element abundance is displayed as a percentage of silicon counts. In the OEM PED glass this depicts enrichment of potassium and tin (blue and red traces, respectively) at the surface of the glass and depletion of sodium (green trace). No such variance is observed with soda-lime glass. The red line indicates the region over which the scans were carried out. (For interpretation of the references to color in this figure legend, the reader is referred to the web version of this article.)
Forensic Science International  , DOI: ( /j.forsciint )
Copyright © 2015 Elsevier Ireland Ltd Terms and Conditions

8. Fig. 7
Comparison of the elemental concentration for the top surface, bulk and bottom surface of OEM PED glass (top) and soda-lime replacement glass (bottom) as determined by LA-ICP-MS.
Forensic Science International  , DOI: ( /j.forsciint )
Copyright © 2015 Elsevier Ireland Ltd Terms and Conditions

9. Fig. 8
Elemental abundance linescans from surface to surface across cross-sections of OEM PED glass (top) and soda-lime replacement glass (bottom) carried out using LA-ICPMS. The depletion of Na and the enrichment of K at the surfaces are evident, as is the invariant abundance of Si and Al across the cross-section of OEM PED Glass. Elemental variation was not observed across the cross-section of soda-lime replacement glass.
Forensic Science International  , DOI: ( /j.forsciint )
Copyright © 2015 Elsevier Ireland Ltd Terms and Conditions

10. Fig. 9
Typical XRF data for OEM PED glass screen (blue trace) and a soda-lime replacement glass (black trace). The lines due to rhodium arise from the X-ray source. (For interpretation of the references to color in this figure legend, the reader is referred to the web version of this article.)
Forensic Science International  , DOI: ( /j.forsciint )
Copyright © 2015 Elsevier Ireland Ltd Terms and Conditions

11. Fig. 10
Plot of PC1 vs PC2 scores for each OEM PED glass screen analysed using XRF displayed by manufacturer.
Forensic Science International  , DOI: ( /j.forsciint )
Copyright © 2015 Elsevier Ireland Ltd Terms and Conditions

12. Fig. 11
Plot of PC1 vs PC3 scores for Apple products, where iPhones are shown as their generation number and non-iPhones are marked as ‘other’.
Forensic Science International  , DOI: ( /j.forsciint )
Copyright © 2015 Elsevier Ireland Ltd Terms and Conditions

13. Fig. 12 Product lifespan for Apple PEDs and Corning glass screens.
Forensic Science International  , DOI: ( /j.forsciint )
Copyright © 2015 Elsevier Ireland Ltd Terms and Conditions