22 July 2014: detection of airborne chemical hazards CDE themed competition

Centre Defence Enterprise

for

Detection of airborne chemical hazards CDE Innovation Network 22 July 2014

© Crown copyright 2013 Dstl

23 July 2014

Contents

• Introduction • Chemical hazards • Military context • In-service equipment • Requirements for CDE competition


23 July 2014

Gas! Gas! Quick, boys - An ecstasy of fumbling, Fitting the clumsy helmets just in time; But someone still was yelling out and stumbling And flound'ring like a man in fire or lime... Dim, through the mist panes and thick green light, As under a green sea, I saw him drowning. Wilfred Owen (1893 – 1918)


23 July 2014

WW I German soldiers advancing through a gas cloud

Introduction

Chemical hazards


23 July 2014

• Chemical warfare agents (CWA) • Incapacitants and riot control agents • Toxic industrial chemicals (TICs)

• Gross physiological effect on man

– lethal, casualty producing, incapacitating

• Specific physiological effect – symptoms (blisters, breathing, hallucination)

• Physiochemical properties – persistent, non-persistent

http://www.globalsecurity.org/wmd/facility/images/newport-19970924087.jpg


23 July 2014

Class Example Symptoms

CWA - Nerve (organophosphate)

Sarin (GB) VX

Lethal: miosis, salivation, convulsions, asphyxiation

CWA - Choking Chlorine, phosgene Lethal: lung damage, irritation to eyes and respiratory tract

CWA - Blood Hydrogen cyanide, cyanogen chloride

Lethal: respiratory, circulatory and heart failure

CWA - Blister agent Sulphur mustard, lewisite

Damaging: skin blisters, eye damage, damage to respiratory tract

Incapacitants Fentanyl, BZ Dose dependent: disorientation, hallucination, unconsciousness, death

Riot control CS Temporary effect: sensory irritation, disabling physical effects

Toxic industrial chemicals

Chlorine, ammonia Lethal: coughing, irritation to eyes, nose and respiratory tract

Chemical structures


23 July 2014

P R

X O

O

Organophosphate ester

Nerve

Cl C

Cl

O Phosgene

Cl Cl Chlorine

Choking

Cyanogen chloride N C Cl

N C H Hydrogen cyanide

Blood

Cl S Cl Sulphur mustard

Cl As Cl

Cl

Lewisite

Blister

Physical properties


23 July 2014

Chemical Boiling Point (⁰C) Volatility (25⁰C) (mg per m3)

State (25⁰C)

Phosgene

8 >1,000,000 Gas, non-persistent

Water

100 ~150,000 Liquid

GB (sarin)

158 22,000 Liquid

Sulphur mustard

217 910 Liquid, intermediate

Nitrogen mustard 257 110 Liquid

VX

~300 9 Liquid, persistent

Fentanyl n/a n/a Solids

Physical properties


23 July 2014

Deposited hazard

Vapour Aerosol

Airborne hazard

Liquid/solid

Dissemination

Meteorological conditions

Physical properties

Respiratory, eyes

Skin

Respiratory, eyes, skin

The military context


23 July 2014

Everything we do is to support that young soldier on point

Threat

• National Security Strategy – Tier 1 – terrorist organisations – Tier 2 – nation states

• Not Cold War but targeted effects

– disrupt tempo and morale – persistent agents deny ground and equipment


23 July 2014

Who is today’s user? • Most personnel are Chemical Biological Radiological Nuclear (CBRN) generalists

– Royal Navy – British Army – Royal Air Force

• CBRN specialists – Recce and exploitation teams


23 July 2014

What does the user want from detectors? • Survive so timely warning • Operate so accurate information to inform the

commander about what to do next: – what is it?

• generalist = persistency, agent classification • specialist = identification, classification,

quantification – where is it?

• recce and survey - aim is to avoid • hazard management/verify successful

decontamination


23 July 2014

Military factors • Intuitive and easy to handle in IPE • Easily understood alarms • Clear info outputs for CBRN reports • Interconnected • Low false-alarm rate • Size and weight • Low logistic and training burden • High availability


23 July 2014

Is it easy to use by a tired soldier, wearing IPE, in the middle of nowhere, at 3am?

In-service equipment


23 July 2014

Detection concepts


23 July 2014

Standoff airborne/deposited

Vapour/aerosol

Point airborne

Liquid/solid

Sample

In-service capability

• Different sensors for different roles – size – person worn, man portable, platform mounted – selectivity – classification vs identification


23 July 2014


23 July 2014

Physical properties used for detection • Mobility of ion in an electric field

– property used in ion mobility spectrometry – difference in time taken for ions to differentially migrate

down an electric field gradient to a collector

electric field

Faraday plate

drift gas in

drift gas out

sample in

ionisation source

Drift

A

B

Abu

ndan

ce

Time A B

+ +

+ +

+ +

+

+ +

+

+ + +

+ + +

+

+ +

+


23 July 2014


• Mass to charge of ion – property used by mass spectrometry

m/z


23 July 2014


• Mass to charge of ion

– property used by mass spectrometry • Dye solvation

– property used in detector paper

Physical properties used for detection


23 July 2014

• Spectral emission – property used in flame photometric devices, laser-induced

breakdown spectroscopy, fluorescence spectroscopy

E1

E2

hυ



23 July 2014

• Spectral emission • Chemical reaction

– colorimetric response

Residual vapour detector



23 July 2014


• Molecular recognition



23 July 2014


• Molecular recognition

• Optical spectroscopy – Infrared (passive or active), Raman

4000cm-1 3000cm-1 2000cm-1 1000cm-1

X-H attached to hetroatoms

C-H C≡C C ≡N

Single bonds

Double bonds

• Any others?


23 July 2014


Requirements for this CDE competition


23 July 2014

• Innovative approaches to detect toxic chemicals in vapour and/or aerosol form


23 July 2014

Technical requirement

Vapour Aerosol

? ?

? ?

? ?

? ?

? ?

?

?

? ?

?

High sensitivity

High selectivity

High sensitivity

Range of materials

How sensitive?

• Acute Exposure Guideline Levels (AEGL)* • Used for a rare, typically accidental, exposure

– based on acute exposure, not appropriate for frequent exposure

• Threshold exposure limits for a given exposure time • Categorised by degree of severity of toxic effects


23 July 2014

* http://www.epa.gov/oppt/aegl/index.htm

How sensitive?

• Must detect AEGL-3 (10 minutes): could experience life-threatening health effects or death (example – HCN 27 ppm)

• Preferably detect AEGL-1 (10 minutes): could cause notable discomfort, effects not disabling, are transient and reversible on cessation of exposure (example – HCN 2.5 ppm)


23 July 2014

How selective?

• Is a toxic material present or not? • What class of agent? • What is its molecular composition, ie can it be

identified? • How many materials are likely to produce a

false alarm?


23 July 2014

Aerosol requirements

• Aim for size range of 0.1 to 10 µm diameter • Discriminate chemical hazards from background

– generic information such as size and shape alone is insufficient

– need classification/identification


23 July 2014

Proposals on core technologies

• Proof-of-concept research proposals invited – potential for improving detection and

identification of airborne chemical hazards (point or standoff)

– novel ideas that could become the core technologies in future sensors

• Low technology readiness level (TRL 2-3)


23 July 2014

Future applications

• Proposal must address feasibility to meet these aspirations in the future: – fast response – small size – low weight – low consumable burden – wide dynamic range – low false alarm rates


23 July 2014

Phase-1 funding • Projects will be 4 to 6 months in duration • £500,000 total funding available • Likely to fund higher number of lower-value proposals

£30,000 to £80,000 • Include payment schedule in proposal

– must include at least 1 interim or the final payment before end of March 2015


23 July 2014

Phase-2 exploitation routes

• Potential for successful projects to receive follow-on funding (up to a total of £500,000) from MOD – develop the concept to a higher TRL

• Stakeholder day will be held – each project team will be invited to present outcomes

and review exploitation routes


23 July 2014

Project assessments

• Proposals will be evaluated by a team of assessors covering a range of specialisms – US Department of Defence secondee (under non-disclosure

agreement) – unless a request is made in the proposal for the review to be

carried out only by UK MOD (indicate in innovation description)

• Project must provide a practical demonstration of the concept/technique


23 July 2014

What next?

• 29 July – webinar • 11 September – competition closes (5pm)

– submit proposals through CDE portal

• 15 October – decision conference – contracting complete a few weeks later

• CDE portal questions: [email protected] • Technical questions: [email protected]


23 July 2014

mailto:[email protected]

mailto:[email protected]

Technology

22 July 2014: detection of airborne chemical hazards CDE themed competition