MAGNETIC RESONANCE TECHNOLOGY:
a replacement for existing airport screening systems?
Just imagine that there were a technology that could screen passengers and baggage at the same time without the need to divest or extract articles for separate examination. Science fiction? Perhaps not. Viktor Vegh explains how MRI scans, routinely used in medical examinations, may hold the solution for the aviation security screening system of the future.
he technology of current airport screening systems was developed in the 1970s and it is extensively used across the world today. Although we have seen the advent of improved instrumentation, primarily based on X-ray technology, the screening process is still erroneous. A false judgement of a possibly hazardous and dangerous substance can be due to an incorrect instrument reading (Type I error) or by accepting to transport a person or baggage when they should have been subject to secondary scans (Type II error).
T
Type I and Type II errors have to be reduced to improve screening precision at airports. To improve the detection of liquid explosives, for example, new X-ray scanners utilising large numbers of detectors have recently been developed. These systems enable a reduction in Type I errors through an improvement in object classification by comparing screen data to a database of substances. Importantly, if a substance has not been classified (which means listed in the database) the system fails. To combat Type II errors, a process that removes human judgement needs to be incorporated as part of airport security.
Human
judgement involves the examination of X-ray images, resolution of metal detector alarms, performing body scans with a metal detection wand, physically searching baggage, and maintaining order in an otherwise hectic environment.
Therefore, it is not hard to imagine that Type II errors are frequent in airport screening.
A robust solution is one that is capable of screening for various substances.
For decades the National Research Council has studied airline passenger security and maintains that the ideal detection system in airports is one that is capable of identifying both metallic and non- metallic objects of hazardous or dangerous nature with a low level of Type I errors. Recently, a large amount of emphasis has been placed on monitoring liquids, as they may be used in the manufacture of liquid explosives. The screening information provided to instrument operators should be delivered rapidly, which is sufficiently informative to be able to make an accurate human judgement. It is unclear whether the well-established X-ray technology, or recent fluorescence developments for airport screening, can fill the gap.
20 Download your FREE ASI "iPad/iPhone APP" NOW
Magnetic resonance (MR) technology has also been around since the 1970s, and it is routinely used in hospitals to non-invasively scan patients in detail. Scans are primarily used for diagnosis, which is not dissimilar in nature to diagnosing objects, such as determining the contents of baggage. This is because an MR image of a patient can, for example, reveal locations of tumours, which are substances elucidating a different chemical structure to the rest of the body. Hence, the screening process is established, but its application outside medical imaging has been limited. The MR technique of nuclear magnetic resonance (NMR) spectroscopy
probes the bulk chemical environment of an object, from which the object make-up can be deduced. Magnetic Resonance Spectroscopy (MRS), on the other hand, can localise the chemical environment and deduce its constituents. Hence, MR techniques are capable of resolving information about a sample in 3D with great accuracy.
These abilities provide great
advantages over 2D X-ray scanners. So, why is it that we do not have MR based screening devices in airports? And, might they be the future? Existing high-field MR scanners used in hospitals are expensive and
bulky, as they require expensive cryogenics for cooling, costly hardware and trained personnel for operation. Moreover, stringent international safety guidelines limit the use and inclusion of metallic objects in the vicinity of the scanner. These limitations, on top of the fact that high- field scanners cannot generate an accurate signal in the presence of metallic objects, restrict their applicability in airports. One solution is to significantly reduce the magnetic field strength of the MR scanner.
Recent advances in MR technology have led to the development of so-called ultra-low field MR instruments. They operate at around the Earth’s magnetic field strength; they are inherently low-resolution and take a long time to perform a scan. Nonetheless, the technology has been shown to be robust and it is capable of accurately screening for liquid explosives, amongst other substances. Furthermore, scanning can be performed in the presence of metallic objects, since the technology uses ultra-low magnetic fields. Additionally, since the instrument operates at ultra-low field, it is relatively cheap to manufacture, as the expensive cooling and superconducting materials needed to generate very strong fields of the high-field diagnostic instruments are removed.
April 2012 Aviationsecurityinternational
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52