Um de seus endereços de e-mail não está recebendo e-mails. Atualize ou confirme seu e-mail.

Saiba mais

8 Experimente Premium
Início Minha rede Vagas Mensagens Notificações Eu Para negócios por BRL0

NIJ Portable X-ray Standard

National Institute of Justice

Portable X-Ray Standard NIJ
0603.01: IS IT ANY GOOD?
John Howell
Counter IED Threat Detection Subject Matter Expert
(SME)

27 de abril de 2021

The short answer is "NO!" and it is honestly not worth the paper it is
written on. It was developed in 2007 and x-ray technology has come a very
long way in the last 14 years when it was written. It is VERY outdated and
most of the requirements in the standard and either total crap and have
no real bearing on the real-world counter IED x-ray mission. What is even
worse is that it is so old none of the technological advancements in x-ray
are even covered.

It appears that in the USA it is a toss-up between the ANSI 42.55 (total
crap) or now the NIJ standard (also crap). When you go to the Interagency
Board for Emergency Preparedness and Response website they only have
the NIJ standard listed as the USA National requirement for State and local
Bomb Squads. Using a standard that is 14 years old for a counter IED tool
on a national level is just plain sad no matter how you slice it. In 2007 I was
still using wet Film at the U.S. Army EOD BNCOC Course and even the old
RTR4. It is actually written based on that level of technology. Good job
Interagency Board for Emergency Preparedness!

X-Ray Equipment, Portable or Transportable

Portable or transportable X-ray unit/equipment (including backscatter X-ray
systems), related attachments, equipment, film, image screens, computers for image
storing/transmission, upgrades. Ability to remotely x-ray a suspect package and...
interagencyboard.org

No matter what standard the USA is using my suggestion is that if you are
not in the USA DO NOT use either the ANSI or the NIJ standards because
they are very outdated and poorly written. Just so you do not waste your
time and try and read these "standards" we are going to break down what
 is wrong with both of these standards and why you should never use them
Um de seus endereços de e-mail não está recebendo e-mails. Atualize ou confirme seu e-mail. Saiba mais
to test or select a portable x-ray for a counter IED mission requirement.

ANSI 42.55 Standard and NIJ 0603.01 Standards:

1. The organic detection requirement is totally wrong and very misleading in

the ANSI 42.55 (dual-energy imaging is not even in the NIJ). The test is not
valid and does not accurately measure a system's ability to determine what
kind of material you are potentially dealing with. Materials discrimination
has been around for years and there are known methods for testing this
capability. This standard totally ignored these methods and created a test
that is 100% wrong. It also does not point out that DR panels that claim to
be able to do materials discrimination imaging must be able to have the
same measurements on all locations of the panel in a single scan (which
most cannot).

If you use the ANSI standard no Computed Radiography (CR) system can
pass because they cannot do organic detection. This also means that if the
system does not have a dual-energy capability it also cannot pass the ANSI
42.55 standard. So basically Scan X Scout, NexRay, Liedos, and SmartRay
(which have no dual-energy filter) cannot meet the requirements for
organic detection listed in the ANSI 42.55. Do not even try and tell me you
can do it with pseudo color because I will tear you a new one.

2. Drop testing in the standards is a complete joke and they have you test
the x-ray generator in the case at a distance of 12 inches off the ground. I
guess that Golden Engineering help write this section of the test because it
makes zero sense. The drop testing standard internationally is 1 meter and
it is NOT IN THE CASE. So all of you Americans make sure when you go
down range you have you Golden in the case.....you cannot make this stuff
up.

If you want to read something that details how to do drop testing the
below link is a really good read. If you are looking for a "Standard" this
document will give you some very good references. What is in the NIJ and
ANSI is a complete joke.

Understanding Ruggedness of Electronic Products with

Respect to Drop
Page 1 . Understanding Ruggedness of an Electronic Product with Respect to Drop
Overview During the lifetime of an electronic product, it...
zebra.com

3. The radiation testing is a complete joke and makes zero sense. Why
would we be testing right next to a portable x-ray generator when NONE
OF US are standing next to it when it fires? Also, the radiation meters are
not capable of testing a pulsed x-ray system accurately and neither
standard explains this nor how to "accurately" measure a pulsed x-ray
source. The only thing that matters is that the unit is in compliance with
the FDA and has an accession number. You also have to make sure that it
is registered in your state and you following the radiation safety guidelines
for your individual state.

4. Both the ANSI and the NIJ have an image quality test that to pass you
have to be able to image the entire test object in a single scan. The test is
a very poor test for penetration and image resolution but like all things in
these standards, everything in it is crap. However, you need to understand
 that whatever system you are testing it has to be able to image the entire
Um de seus endereços de e-mail não está recebendo e-mails. Atualize ou confirme seu e-mail. Saiba mais
test object. This means if your panel is not about 1 in bigger than the test
object you cannot pass the standard. The test object is 8.66 x 6.3 inches so
something like a Nexray 4" x 7" sized system has no chance of passing this
test. Anything under 8" x 10" is going to be hard-pressed to fit the image
quality test object in a single scan.

The test is a combination of penetration and wire resolution and is

designed to not allow you to blast away ( 3 -4 sets of 99 pulses) at the step
wedge and keeps you at a set distance away from the test object. If you
cheat (which people will do) you will overexpose the wires and fail the test.
You can see in the below image that you have to image the "Entire" test
object in a single scan. It also says that you have to shoot the x-ray at the
manufacture's suggested distance from the panel. So if your "Standard" is
six feet you will fail this test big time. This is a perfect example of what is
being taught at HDS is NOT incorporated into these USA standards. If HDS
is telling you to shoot all x-rays at a specific distance then ALL testing
needs to be done at that specific distance. That is the distance you will
shoot and that is the distance you need to test your x-ray plain and simple.

Bottom line these standards are horrible and are honestly an

embarrassment to the USA Bomb Squads' technical level of skill on
evaluating a portable x-ray for counter IED operations. Cabinet x-ray
systems have much better standards for evaluating a system vs the ANSI
and the NIJ standards. What is sad is that they are published so somebody
thought they were something you would want the world to see. Anybody
who has a decent level of understanding of what technologies are
available in the x-ray world would laugh at both of these documents. If
anything they are a textbook example of how NOT to write a standard for
a portable x-ray system.
Um de seus endereços de e-mail não está recebendo e-mails. Atualize ou confirme seu e-mail. Saiba mais

If you are interested in learning how to conduct testing to really see which
x-ray system is the best on the market reach out to me and I will send you
some tests that anybody can do and will make the vendors sweat. These
tests will be realistic real-world tests that ensure your system is going to
do its job downrange. You want the best tool for your team and both the
ANSI and the NIJ standards are not going to give you that measurement.
In fact, they are one of the main reasons why the USA is behind the rest of
the world in portable x-ray technology. When you have a crap standard
you have crap technical requirements and your end users are not educated
properly.

Denunciar este artigo

Comentários

Gostei Comentar Compartilhar

Adicionar comentário

Nenhum comentário ainda.

Seja a primeira pessoa a comentar.

Dê início à conversa

John Howell
Counter IED Threat Detection Subject Matter Expert (SME)

Seguir

Mais de John Howell

 Um de seus endereços de e-mail não está recebendo e-mails. Atualize ou confirme seu e-mail. Saiba mais
How "Good"​is the security at
the Super Bowl?
John Howell no LinkedIn
Visualizar todos os 70 artigos
Sobre Acessibilidade
Diretrizes da Comunidade Carreiras
Termos e Privacidade Preferências de anúncios
Soluções de Vendas Para celular
Central de Segurança
LinkedIn Corporation © 2024
Novo declares war on CP USA Counter IED Portable X- Walk Through Metal
technology Ray Standards Detectors: The Nonferrous
Handgun Threat Myth
John Howell no LinkedIn John Howell no LinkedIn
John Howell no LinkedIn
Soluções de Talentos Dúvidas? Selecionar idioma
Acesse a nossa Central de Ajuda.
Soluções de Marketing Português (Português)
Publicidade Gerencie sua conta e privacidade
Acesse suas Configurações.
Pequenas empresas
Visibilidade da recomendação
Saiba mais sobre os conteúdos recomendados.