Go Down

Topic: How To detection of explosives materials ....? (Read 15172 times) previous topic - next topic

retrolefty


I wonder how many different Government agencies are already monitoring this Thread to see if they need to arrest someone?

I am a pacifist. I don't believe the Arduino forum should be used to discuss weapons - including explosives.

...R


Does that include a ban on discussing the proper care, handling, use, and charging of LiPo batteries?   ;)

runaway_pancake

They look for nitrogen (nitrogen compounds).
"Who is like unto the beast? who is able to make war with him?"
When all else fails, check your wiring!

AWOL

. . . as many a traveling gardener or farmworker has found, to their dismay

falahgs


Thanks for all the help
Notice
I do not want to make explosives ....!!!  But I want to detect explosives Dear friends, peace-loving.....
I am a physicist and programmer in IT ..... I have a study and research on how to detect explosives and explosive belts , especially at checkpoints and government institutions in Iraq and exposed before exploding on the innocent ...
As I said earlier in my participation in this wonderful forum and I am a newbie in New MCU Arduino…
Previously I have projects in Security Systems for shops , homes and control checkpoints by Arduino IDE  and Processing IDE.
Currently studying search for how to detect explosives and explosive belts , especially by suicide bombers in Iraq .. I hope to help by experts sensors of chemical or physical
There Is electromagnetic field sensors benefit in this case ...?
With many thanks and appreciation


falahgs


Peter_I



........
Currently studying search for how to detect explosives and explosive belts , especially by suicide bombers in Iraq .. I hope to help by experts sensors of chemical or physical
There Is electromagnetic field sensors benefit in this case ...?
....[/size]



OK.
You want to perform standoff detection of explosives.
It is the Holy Grail of explosives detection (and a lot of other "detection" subjects). The big problem is, that explosives do not emit easily detectable signals on their own and in open air, you have to get very close to "smell" them chemically.

To be of any use, your system should detect the bomb before you and your detector are within range of it.


Try to google for "standoff detection", and you'll see that millions are poured into this field of research (with relatively limited results).
As long as you do not have a sensor that can return any useful signals to you, the arduino is no help.

"Nothing is foolproof to a sufficiently talented fool"

AWOL

There's also a line of research using rats, but I think that is specifically for mine clearance

robtillaart

You should broaden your research scope to make it easier.  A rephrase of your goal opens new ways of approaching the problem. Defining a problem too specific cut off many possible solutions.

Rephrase 1:  finding people with explosive belts    =>    finding people wearing something under their clothes.

Check the persons BMI:
Measure the length and weight of a person.  // ping sensor on head, weight scale under their feet.
if they would wear a belt their weight would probably lie above some average.

automated body contour check
- rontgen scanner?
- a robot that follows the contours?
    might not be as intrusive for many people as when a person does the "body check"
These contours should match some expectations. Belts typically result in sudden blobs.

These ideas are definitely not fool proof but could be a first selection; would also detect other hidden things


Rephrase 2: finding people with explosive belts    =>  Prevent people wearing anything:

=> the naked tunnel
People have to walk naked through a tunnel ( man/women separated) clothes can be inspected separately
Such "tunnels" are used in diamond mines to prevent smuggling/stealing diamonds.


There are many other ways to rephrase your problem, give it a try.


Rob Tillaart

Nederlandse sectie - http://arduino.cc/forum/index.php/board,77.0.html -
(Please do not PM for private consultancy)

Peter_I

#23
May 10, 2014, 01:39 pm Last Edit: May 10, 2014, 01:42 pm by Peter_I Reason: 1

You should broaden your research scope to make it easier.  A rephrase of your goal opens new ways of approaching the problem.
......
automated body contour check
.....
There are many other ways to rephrase your problem, give it a try.


I agree that rephrasing the question is probably a much more sound approach.

My best guess would also be to analyze body shape, body language or movements, to see if someone is stressed or carries something heavy/bulky under the clothes.
But on the other hand..... We are talking about a part of the world, where wearing a full body tent is considered "well dressed".
It will efficiently shield (or is modifiable to shield) against most methods of observation.
But people will rather be blown up than change that.


There is big money in security, and lots of science going on.
As a chemist I would put my money on spectroscopic methods, but I am still  doubtful whether it can be made to work in the real world outside the labs.
http://www.iaf.fraunhofer.de/content/dam/iaf/documents/Presse/infomaterial/GF4_PB_Explosivdetektion_Web.pdf
"Nothing is foolproof to a sufficiently talented fool"

Coding Badly


The solution to detecting explosives...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Detection_dog

At this point in time, developing dog training technology (more efficiently fielding well trained dogs and handlers) is a far better use of resources than trying to develop explosives detection technology.

http://www.popsci.com/science/article/2013-05/sniff-test
http://www.cnn.com/2009/TRAVEL/12/30/bomb.sniffing.dogs/

Robin2



The solution to detecting explosives...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Detection_dog



What about a Beagle Bone Black ?

...R
Two or three hours spent thinking and reading documentation solves most programming problems.

Paul__B

So you see everyone is having fun with this discussion if only because it clearly has nothing whatsoever to do with Arduinox.

While we have no doubt of your serious intent, and note you indeed have some experience with the Arduino platform, you are nevertheless in the same category as the "newbies" or rank beginners who come here and ask for advice in using an Arduino for something that fundamentally has nothing to do with microcontrollers of any sort.

Detecting explosives is a matter of chemistry.  The instruments used for this are in general, variants of mass spectrometers or possibly nanotechnology sensors which react to specific molecules, possibly using biotechnology.  Building a mass spectrometer is a substantial engineering task which just might - somewhere along the way - involve a microcontroller or two, but these would be very much peripheral aspects of the project as they would be for nanosensors.

It most certainly has nothing to do with electromagnetic field sensors because explosives per se are neither sensitive to, nor emit any form of electromagnetic field.

And the current situation is that despite considerable research, there is at least at present, little that is more practical in use than a suitably trained dog, or less expensive to maintain.

falahgs


You should broaden your research scope to make it easier.  A rephrase of your goal opens new ways of approaching the problem. Defining a problem too specific cut off many possible solutions.
There are many other ways to rephrase your problem, give it a try.


Thank you for your comments and assistance and ideas

1- Can we use the sensor detector changes in the electromagnetic field of a person dressed explosive belt ... ?

2-Can we account for changes in capacitance sensor by contact between a body and EMF Sensor board ?

3- Are we could use ultrasound sensors to detect changes in the amplitude of the reflected wave echo after tigger at  body wearing an explosives belt ?

4- Can we use the waves infrared sensor detector infrared waves to see changes in the body emitting waves of heat before dressing and after dressing as a measure of changes between two values and knowledge of the body that holds the belt of explosives ?

With many thanks and appreciation


Peter_I


Thank you for your comments and assistance and ideas

"the same questions again"



Did you read the answers to your first questions?
"Nothing is foolproof to a sufficiently talented fool"

Paul__B


Did you read the answers to your first questions?


And here am I thinking I had summarised the situation most succinctly!

Particularly with respect to "electromagnetic field sensors" which of course, necessarily includes magnetic, capacitive, radio waves, infra-red, light, ultraviolet.  And ultrasound.  May not quite include X-rays and gamma spectroscopy or "dowsing".   ;)

Go Up