Effective methods for detecting explosives
We often emphasize that our Kerber and Segment series hazardous substance detectors are primarily trace detectors (tiny solid particles on the surfaces of objects being inspected) when it comes to detecting explosives. The fact is that the method of detecting explosive vapors (sniffing the object being inspected with a gas analyzer) has a number of limitations in real operating conditions.
Let's look at each factor that limits their effectiveness and explain why contact methods of detecting explosive traces are more effective:
• Low vapor concentration: Explosives often have low volatility, which results in low vapor concentrations in the air, making them difficult to detect. When contact collecting and analyzing explosive traces from surfaces, physical traces are collected directly, allowing detectors to analyze concentrated residues of the substance, rather than diluted vapors;
• Effect of air currents: Air currents, including those caused by any movement of people in enclosed spaces, can quickly dissipate vapors, reducing their concentration. The contact method collects samples directly from surfaces, eliminating the influence of wind;
• Airborne contaminants: In real-world conditions, there are many other substances in the air that can interfere with the detector's operation, creating interference or causing false alarms. With contact collection, the influence of airborne contaminants is significantly reduced, since samples taken from the surface are less susceptible to the influence of foreign volatile compounds. Even if the explosive is packaged in sealed containers, trace amounts often remain on external surfaces or can be detected with minimal damage to the packaging.
Contact methods of detecting trace explosives are therefore less susceptible to the influence of factors that limit the effectiveness of contactless "sniffing" of the air, making them more reliable in real-world operating conditions.