Explosive detection: Difference between revisions

Revision as of 22:37, 20 September 2022

Latest revision as of 21:42, 17 July 2025

(26 intermediate revisions by 11 users not shown)

Line 1:

{{Short description|Non-destructive inspection process}}

[[Image:Explosive detection dog, CBP.jpg|right|thumb|An [[U.S. Customs and Border Protection]] officer with an explosive-detection dog]]

'''Explosive detection''' is a non-destructive [[inspection]] process to determine whether a container contains [[explosive material]]. Explosive detection is commonly used at [[airport]]s, [[port]]s and for [[border control]].

Line 5 ⟶ 6:

===Colorimetrics & automated colorimetrics===

The use of [[colorimetric]] test kits for explosive detection is one of the most established,simple methods for simplestofficers, and most widely used methodsmethod for the detection of explosives. Colorimetric detection of explosives involves applying a chemical reagent to an unknown material or sample and observing a [[color reaction]]. Common color reactions are known and indicate to the user if there is an explosive material present and in many cases the group of explosiveexplosives from which the material is derived. The major groups of explosives are [[Nitroaromatic compound|nitroaromatic]], [[nitrate ester]], and [[Nitroamine|nitramine]] explosives, as well as inorganic nitrate -based explosives. Other groups include [[Chlorate|chlorateschlorate]]s and [[Peroxide|peroxidesperoxide]]s which are not nitro based explosives. Since explosives usually contain nitrogen, detection often is based around spotting nitrogenous compounds. As a result, traditional colorimetric tests have a disadvantage: some explosive compounds (such as [[acetone peroxide]]) do not contain nitrogen and are therefore harder to detect.<ref>{{Cite book |lastlast1=Marshall |firstfirst1=Maurice |url=https://www.worldcat.org/oclc/316212529 |title=Aspects of explosives detection |last2=Oxley |first2=Jimmie |date=2009 |publisher=[[Elsevier]] |isbn=978-0-08-092314-7 |edition=1st |___location=Amsterdam |doi=10.1016/B978-0-12-374533-0.X0001-3 |oclc=316212529}}</ref>

===Dogs===

[[Detection dog|Specially trained dogs]] can be used to detect explosives using their noses which are very sensitive to [[Dog#Smell |scents]]. While very effective, their usefulness becomes degraded as a dog becomes tired or bored.

These dogs are trained by specially trained handlers to identify the scents of several common explosive materials and notify their handler when they detect one of these scents. The dogs indicate a 'hit' by taking an action they are trained to provide ⁠— ⁠generally a passive response, such as sitting down and waiting.

The explosive detection canine was originated at the [[Metropolitan Police Department of the District of Columbia|Metropolitan Police Department]] in Washington, D.C. in 1970, by then trainer Charles R. Kirchner.<ref>{{Cite book |last=Newlon |first=Clarke |url=https://www.worldcat.org/oclc/881180 |title=Police Dogs in Action |date=1974 |publisher=[[Dodd, Mead & Co.]] |isbn=9780396069126 |___location=New York |oclc=881180}}</ref>

The explosive detection canine was first used in Algeria in 1959 under the command of [[General Constantine]].<ref>{{Citation |lastlast1=Grandjean |firstfirst1=Dominique |title=Practical Guide for Sporting and Working Dogs |date=2000 |url=https://www.worldcat.org/oclc/1052842687 |page=4 |publisher=[[Royal Canin]] |isbn=2-914193-02-5 |oclc=1052842687 |access-date=2022-09-20 |last2=Moquet |first2=Nathalie |last3=Pawlowiez |first3=Sandrine |last4=Tourtebatte |first4=Anne-Karen |last5=Jean |first5=Boris |last6=Bacqué |first6=Hélenè}}.</ref>

Recent studies suggest that [[Mass spectrometry|mass spectrometric]] [[Explosive vapor detector|vapor analysis techniques]], such as [[secondary electrospray ionization]] (SESI-MS), could support canine training for explosive detection.<ref>{{Cite journal|last1=Ong|first1=Ta-Hsuan|last2=Mendum|first2=Ted|last3=Geurtsen|first3=Geoff|last4=Kelley|first4=Jude|last5=Ostrinskaya|first5=Alla|last6=Kunz|first6=Roderick|date=2017-06-09|title=Use of Mass Spectrometric Vapor Analysis To Improve Canine Explosive Detection Efficiency|journal=[[Analytical Chemistry (journal)|Analytical Chemistry]]|volume=89|issue=12|pages=6482–6490|doi=10.1021/acs.analchem.7b00451|pmid=28598144|issn=0003-2700}}</ref>

===Honey bees===

Line 25 ⟶ 26:

{{main|Explosives trace detector}}

{{see also|Machine olfaction}}

Several types of machines have been developed to detect trace signatures for various explosive materials. The most common technology for this application, as seen in US airports, is [[ion mobility spectrometry]] (IMS). This method is similar to [[mass spectrometry]] (MS), where molecules are ionized and then moved in an electric field in a vacuum, except that IMS operates at atmospheric pressure. The time that it takes for an ion, in IMS, to move a specified distance in an electric field is indicative of that ion's size-to-charge ratio: ions with a larger cross -section will collide with more gas at atmospheric pressure and will, therefore, be slower.

[[Gas chromatography]] (GC) is often coupled to the detection methods discussed above in order to separate molecules before detection. This not only improves the performance of the detector but also adds another dimension of data, as the time it takes for a molecule to pass through the GC may be used as an indicator of its identity. Unfortunately, GC normally requires a bottled gas, which presents logistical issues since bottles would have to be replenished. GC columns operated in the field are prone to degradation from atmospheric gases and oxidation, as well as bleeding of the [[Stationary phase (chemistry)|stationary phase]]. Columns must be very fast, as well, since many of the applications demand that the complete analysis be completed in less than a minute.{{Citation needed |date=January 2020}}

===Spectrometry===

Technologies based on [[ion mobility spectrometer]] (IMS) include [[ion trap mobility spectrometry]] (ITMS), and [[differential mobility spectrometry]] (DMS). [[Amplifying fluorescent polymers]] (AFP) use a molecular recognition to "turn off" or quench the [[fluorescence]] of a polymer. [[Chemiluminescence]] was used frequently in the 1990s, but is less common than the ubiquitous IMS. Several attempts are being made to miniaturize, ruggedize and make MS affordable for field applications; such as an [[aerosol]] polymer that fluoresces blue under UV but is colorless when it reacts with nitrogen groups.<ref>{{Cite web |last=Barras |first=Colin |date=2008-06-03 |title=Glowing spray lets CSI operatives 'dust' for explosives |url=https://www.newscientist.com/channel/tech/dn14048-glowing-spray-lets-csi-operatives-dust-for-explosives.html |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220920223601/https://www.newscientist.com/article/dn14048-glowing-spray-lets-csi-operatives-dust-for-explosives/?ignored=irrelevant |archive-date=20 September 2022 |publisher=[[New Scientist]]}}</ref>

One technique compares reflected [[ultraviolet]], [[infrared]] and [[visible light]] measurements on multiple areas of the suspect material. This has an advantage over olfactory methods in that a sample does not need to be prepared. A patent exists for a portable explosive detector using this method.<ref>{{Cite web |last=Mullins |first=Justin |date=2008-05-28 |title=Portable explosives detector |url=https://www.newscientist.com/blog/invention/2008/05/portable-explosives-detector.html |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20080911045557/https://www.newscientist.com/blog/invention/2008/05/portable-explosives-detector.html |archive-date=11 September 2008 |website=[[New Scientist]] Blogs}}</ref>

Mass spectrometry is seen as the most relevant new spectrometry technique.<ref>{{Citation | url = http://www.nap.edu/catalog/10996.html | title = Opportunities to Improve Airport Passenger Screening with Mass Spectrometry | publisher = [[National Academies Press]] | doi = 10.17226/10996 | isbn = 978-0-309-09240-1 | year = 2004 }}.</ref> Several manufacturers have products that are under development, both in the US, Europe and Israel,<ref>{{cite web | publisher = Laser detect |url= http://www.laser-detect.com/brochures/LUMIN9689_narrowgate.pdf |title= Lumin 9689 Narrow gate |access-date=2012-04-11 |url-status= deadsubscription | type = brochure | format = [[Portable document format | PDF]] |archive-url= https://web.archive.org/web/20120823083344/http://www.laser-detect.com/brochures/LUMIN9689_narrowgate.pdf |archive-date= 2012-08-23}}.</ref> including Laser-Detect in Israel, [[Teledyne FLIR|FLIR Systems]] and Syagen in the US, and SEDET in Europe.

===X-ray machines===

Specially designed [[X-ray machine]]s using [[computed axial tomography]] can detect explosives by looking at the density of the items being examined.. They use [[computed axial tomography]] basedThese systems that are enhancedfurnished with dedicated software, containing an explosives threat library and [[false-color]] coding, to assist operators with their dedicated threat resolution protocols.<ref>{{CitationCite journal |last1=Wells |first1=K. |last2=Bradley |first2=D.A. needed|date=July2012 |title=A review of X-ray explosives detection techniques for checked baggage |url=http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.apradiso.2012.01.011 |journal=Applied Radiation and Isotopes |volume=70 |issue=8 |pages=1729–1746 |doi=10.1016/j.apradiso.2012.01.011 |pmid=22608981 |issn=0969-8043|url-access=subscription 2008}}</ref> X-ray detection is also used to detect related components such as [[detonator]]s, but this can be foiled if such devices are hidden inside other electronic equipment.<ref>{{cite magazine |url= https://www.newscientist.com/channel/tech/weapons/dn9715|title=Analysis: Explosive detection technologies| first =Will | last = Knight|date=10 August 2006 |magazine=[[New Scientist]] news service |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220920215223/https://www.newscientist.com/article/dn9715-analysis-explosive-detection-technologies/ |archive-date=20 September 2022}}</ref>

Adding [[chemical marker|marker]] substances (X-ray opacifiers) to commercial explosives is also an option.<ref>National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 1998. Containing the Threat from Illegal Bombings: An Integrated National Strategy for Marking, Tagging, Rendering Inert, and Licensing Explosives and Their Precursors. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. [[doi:10.17226/5966]].</ref>

Recently, [[machine learning]] algorithms have been developed that can automatically detect threat in x-ray scans. <ref>{{Cite journal|last1=Heitz|first1=Geremy|last2=Chechik|first2=Gal|title=Object separation in x-ray image sets|date=2010|journal=IEEE Computer Society Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition|pages=2093–2100|publisher=[[IEEE]] |doi=10.1109/cvpr.2010.5539887|isbn=978-1-4244-6984-0|s2cid=2643208}}</ref><ref>{{Citation|last=Mery|first=Domingo|title=Simulation in X-ray Testing|date=2015|work=Computer Vision for X-Ray Testing|pages=241–266|place=Cham|publisher=[[Springer International Publishing]] |doi=10.1007/978-3-319-20747-6_7|isbn=978-3-319-20746-9}}</ref><ref>{{Cite journal|last1=Akcay|first1=Samet|last2=Breckon|first2=Toby P.|title=An evaluation of region based object detection strategies within X-ray baggage security imagery|journal= IEEE International Conference on Image Processing (ICIP)|publisher=[[IEEE]]|date=2017|pages=1337–1341|doi=10.1109/icip.2017.8296499|isbn=978-1-5090-2175-8|s2cid=3451234}}</ref>

===Neutron activation===

Specially designed machines bombard the suspect explosives with neutrons and read the resulting [[gamma radiation]] decay signatures to determine the chemical composition of the sample. The earliest developed forms of [[Neutron Activation Analysis]] use low -energy neutrons to determine the ratios of nitrogen, chlorine, and hydrogen in the chemical species in question, and are an effective means of identifying most conventional explosives. Unfortunately, the much smaller thermal [[Neutron cross section]]s of carbon and oxygen limit the ability of this technique to identify their abundances in the unknown species, and it is partly for this reason that terror organizations have favored nitrogen absent explosives such as [[Acetone peroxide|TATP]] in the construction of [[Improvised explosive device|IED]]s. Modifications to the experimental protocol can allow for easier identification of carbon and oxygen -based species, (e.g. the use of [[inelastic scattering]] from [[fast neutron]]s to produce detectable gamma rays, as opposed to simple absorption occurring with the [[thermal neutron]]s), but these modifications require equipment that is prohibitively more complex and expensive, preventing their widespread implementation.<ref>{{Cite journal | url= https://www.researchgate.net/publication/264561529 | doi=10.1007/s10967-014-3260-5 | title=A review of conventional explosives detection using active neutron interrogation | journal=[[Journal of Radioanalytical and Nuclear Chemistry]] | volume= 301| issue=3| pages=629–39| year= 2014 | last1=Whetstone| first1=Z. D. | last2= Kearfott| first2=K. J.| s2cid=93318773 }}</ref>

===Silicon nanowires for trace detection of explosives===

[[Silicon nanowire]] configured as [[field effect transistor]]s have been demonstrated to detect explosives including [[TNT]], [[PETN]] and [[RDX]] in sensitives superior to those of canines.<ref>{{cite news|last=Prachi |first= Patel|title=An Ultrasensitive Explosives Detector|url= http://www.technologyreview.com/news/420882/an-ultrasensitive-explosives-detector/ |newspaper= [[MIT Technology Review]] |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120811125250/http://www.technologyreview.com/news/420882/an-ultrasensitive-explosives-detector/ |archive-date=11 August 2012}}</ref><ref>{{cite journal|last1=Engel |first1= Yoni|last2=Elnathan|first2=R.|last3= Pevzner |first3=A.|last4=Davidi|first4= G.|last5=Flaxer|first5=E.|last6= Patolsky|first6= F.|title= Supersensitive Detection of Explosives by Silicon Nanowire Arrays|journal=[[Angewandte Chemie]] International Edition|date=10 September 2010 |volume=49|issue=38|pages=6830–35 |doi= 10.1002/anie.201000847 |pmid= 20715224|doi-access=free}}</ref> The detection in this method is performed by passing a liquid or vapor containing the target explosive over the surface of a chip containing tens to hundreds of silicon nanowire sensing elements. Molecules of the explosive material interact with the surface of the nanowires and induce a measurable change in the electrical properties of the nanowire.

==Detection aids==

Line 51 ⟶ 52:

==Bogus detection devices==

The [[United States Department of Justice|US Department of Justice]] warned in a [[National Institute of Justice]] publication, "Guide for the Selection of Commercial Explosives Detection Systems for Law Enforcement Applications (NIJ Guide 100-99)," about the ongoing trend of "bogus" explosives detection equipment being sold to unsuspecting consumers. The report mentions by name the [[Quadro Tracker]], an apparent [[dowsing rod]] with a freely pivoting radio antenna rod with no functioning internal components. On August 8–9, 2005 the [[Naval Explosive Ordance Disposal Technical Division]] via the United States Counter -Terrorism Technology Task Force conducted testing on the [[Sniffex|SNIFFEX]] and concluded that "the SNIFFEX handheld detector does not work".<ref>{{Citation | title = Test Report: The Detection Capability of the Sniffex handheld Explosives Detector |date=September 2005 |author=[[Naval Explosive Ordnance Disposal Technology Division]] | url = http://s3.amazonaws.com/propublica/assets/docs/NavyReport.pdf |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220814000040/http://s3.amazonaws.com/propublica/assets/docs/NavyReport.pdf |archive-date= 14 August 2022}}</ref>

{{QuoteBlockquote | …There is a rather large community of people around the world that believes in [[dowsing]]: the ancient practice of using forked sticks, swinging rods, and pendulums to look for underground water and other materials. These people believe that many types of materials can be located using a variety of dowsing methods. Dowsers claim that the dowsing device will respond to any buried anomalies, and years of practice are needed to use the device with discrimination (the ability to cause the device to respond to only those materials being sought). Modern dowsers have been developing various new methods to add discrimination to their devices. These new methods include molecular frequency discrimination (MFD) and harmonic induction discrimination (HID). MFD has taken the form of everything from placing a xerox copy of a Polaroid photograph of the desired material into the handle of the device, to using dowsing rods in conjunction with frequency generation electronics (function generators). '''None of these attempts to create devices that can detect specific materials such as explosives (or any materials for that matter) have been proven successful in controlled double-blind scientific tests.''' In fact, all testing of these inventions has shown these devices to perform no better than random chance…<ref>{{cite web |author=[[Office of Justice Programs|US Department of Justice Office of Justice Programs]] |url= http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/nij/pubs-sum/178913.htm |title= Guide for the Selection of Commercial Explosives Detection Systems for Law Enforcement Applications: NIJ Guide 100-99 |date= September 1999 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220320180553/https://www.ojp.gov/pdffiles1/nij/178913.pdf |archive-date=20 March 2022}}</ref>}}

A number of fake dowsing rod-style detection devices have been widely used in [[Iraq]] and [[Thailand]], notably the [[ADE 651]] and [[GT200]], where they have been reported to have failed to detect bombs that have killed hundreds of people and injured thousands more.<ref name="Radford 2017">{{Cite magazine |last=Radford |first=Ben |date=2017 |title=The Legacy of Fake Bomb Detectors in Iraq |url=https://skepticalinquirer.org/2017/01/the-legacy-of-fake-bomb-detectors-in-iraq/ |publisher=[[Committee for Skeptical Inquiry]] |volume=41 |issue=1 |page=7 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220225215345/https://skepticalinquirer.org/2017/01/the-legacy-of-fake-bomb-detectors-in-iraq/ |archive-date=25 February 2022 |authorlink=Ben Radford |journal=[[Skeptical Inquirer]]}}</ref><ref>{{Cite news |lastlast1=Evans |firstfirst1=Dominic |last2=Hameed |first2=Saif |date=July 26, 2016 |title=From Beirut to Baghdad, 'useless' bomb detectors guard against disaster |work=[[Reuters]] |url=https://www.reuters.com/article/us-mideast-security-detectors-idUSKCN1061VK |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20211107151715/https://www.reuters.com/article/us-mideast-security-detectors-idUSKCN1061VK |archive-date=7 November 2021}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |title=The Worldwide Fake Bomb Detector Scam – Compendium of Arms Trade Corruption |url=https://sites.tufts.edu/corruptarmsdeals/the-worldwide-fake-bomb-detector-scam/ |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220528231449/https://sites.tufts.edu/corruptarmsdeals/the-worldwide-fake-bomb-detector-scam/ |archive-date=28 May 2022 |website=[[World Peace Foundation]] |date=5 May 2017 |publisher=[[The Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy]] at [[Tufts University]]}}</ref> Additional names of fake dowsing rod style detectors include ADE101, ADE650, [[Alpha 6 (device)|Alpha 6]], XK9, SNIFFEX, HEDD1, AL-6D, H3TEC, PK9.

==See also==

Line 65 ⟶ 66:

==References==

{{reflistReflist|35em}}

==External links==

*{{Commons category-inline|Explosive detection}}

{{Authority control}}

{{DEFAULTSORT:Explosive Detection}}