When it comes to detecting explosives, traditional detection methods like X-ray machines and metal detectors, still reign supreme. However, recent technological advancements in the field of nanotechnology have led to the development of nanoparticle-based explosive detectors that have the potential to outshine traditional detection approaches.
So, how do these two detection methods compare against each other and what sets them apart? Let's take a closer look.
Traditional Detection
Traditional detection methods have been used for years in airports, train stations, and other public areas to detect explosives. These methods use X-ray scanners or metal detectors to identify suspicious items in bags or on a person. The scanners emit X-rays or metal-detecting waves that penetrate through the object and bounce back a signal to the machine. Any suspicious or metallic items cause a different signal that allows the scanner to identify the threat.
The traditional detection method is affordable, easy to use, and has been widely adopted in many public facilities globally. However, these methods have some limitations, and sophisticated explosives made of materials that cannot be easily detected can slip through these scanners unnoticed.
Nanoparticle-based Detection
Nanoparticle-based explosives detectors work differently from the traditional detection methods. These detectors use tiny nanoparticles with unique properties that enable them to detect explosive materials. When the nanoparticles come in contact with the explosive material, they absorb and concentrate it, causing a unique chemical reaction that can be detected by the device.
One of the significant advantages of nanoparticle-based detectors is their ability to detect trace amounts of explosives, making them an attractive option. The risk of missing explosive materials is minimal, even when they are concealed in non-conductive or non-metallic substances.
However, despite their accuracy, these detectors are still not widely adopted as they are relatively new, and the technology is still coming up. Additionally, these detectors are quite expensive compared to traditional detectors, making them less accessible to smaller public facilities.
Conclusion
To conclude, traditional detection methods are still widely used due to their affordability and ease of use. However, they do have their limitations in detecting sophisticated explosives that cannot be easily detected. On the other hand, nanoparticle-based detectors are a more accurate and reliable option, but they have not fully replaced traditional detection methods due to their high cost and newness.
References:
- Ritenberg M, Huleihel M. Nanotechnology-Based Detection and Diagnosis of Infectious Diseases: Advancements and Challenges. J Nanomater. 2018 Jan 31;2018:2597020. doi: 10.1155/2018/2597020. PMID: 29997464; PMCID: PMC5981679.
- Albalawi A, Alharbi HA, Badr G. Detection of Explosives Based on Fluorescence Quenching of Nanoparticles. Nanomaterials (Basel). 2020 Nov 23;10(11):2300. doi: 10.3390/nano10112300. PMID: 33238598; PMCID: PMC7695948.