This section explores the benefits and drawbacks of traditional detectors which are commercially available, and looks at the prototype and test detectors designed to detect and locate alpha sources through air radioluminescence. Some novel further ideas are also presented. The detectors included are designed to identify the location of an alpha emitter and not to characterise that source, hence carrying out part of the characterisation required for nuclear decommissioning, but not all.
5.3. Solar-Blind Detectors
In order to address the main obstacle to detecting radioluminescence, solar-blind detectors, those sensitive only in the UVC wavelength range, have provided the basis for prototype detector systems shown to be operable in normal indoor lighting conditions.
In 2011 Ivanov et al. used an off-the-shelf, solar-blind, UV camera to locate alpha contamination in daylight conditions through air radioluminescence [
30]. They had estimated in 2009 that they would be able to detect alpha radiation of 5 MeV energy with an activity between 40 and 100 Bq cm
−2 with a corresponding integration time of 600 s to 3600 s from a separation of 3 m between detector and source [
29]. The camera they used (DayCor SuperB UV, Ofil Ltd., Lawrenceville, GA, USA) is designed to show the corona and arcing of high voltage equipment for fault diagnosis. It is ‘blind’ to UVA and UVB (400–315 nm and 315–280 nm wavelengths respectively), and only detects UV light of less than 290 nm (UVC). This removes the interference of the stronger background light, allowing detection of the much weaker air radioluminescence in daylight conditions.
They present an image of a 5 × 104 Bq alpha source with an integration time of 10,000 seconds (approx. 3 h). They also present images of background spots generated by noise, as a single frame and a sum of 7500 frames. This shows an apparently random distribution of these background spots over time, which the researchers were able to filter out to some degree for better sensitivity. They also presented a filtered image taken with a 500 s integration time.
Their use of cameras that are available off-the-shelf and are therefore mature technology is beneficial in terms of the reliability. As yet no one has put forward a tested method to quantify the intensity of the light captured by these images, however this could potentially be used to determine the activity levels. This work shows that the approach of using solar-blind detectors in detecting air radioluminescence is viable in addressing the issue of background UV radiation interference, although Ivanov et al. note that there is future work to be carried out to quantify and apply their findings [
30].
In 2017 Crompton et al. were able to detect the radioluminescence from a 6.95 MBq Po-210 source from 20 mm distance using a solar-blind UVTron flame sensor (UVTron R9533, Hamamatsu, Hamamatsu City, Shizuoka Pref., 430-8587, Japan) in ordinary laboratory lighting [
18]. This sensor is designed to detect the UVC emissions from flames for fire detection purposes and is sensitive in the 180–260 nm wavelength range. The sensor was used with the manufacturer’s off-the-shelf driver board configured to emit a pulse for each UVC photon detected. An average pulse rate of 0.3280 cps was recorded, with a background pulse rate of 2.224 × 10
–3 ± 0.7034 × 10
–3 counts per second. A fused silica window was inserted between the sensor and source to prevent alpha particles directly impacting on the sensor. Although the distance between sensor and source is small, they assess that in this configuration the maximum detectable distance could have been 240 mm.
Crompton et al. also tested flowing various noble gases over the source. They found that xenon increased the cps by 52%, P-10 increased the count by 32%, neon by 26%, and krypton 23%. Interestingly they found that nitrogen had little effect on the cps. However, they note that these results require replication for verification, especially in light of the difference between the increase in radioluminescence reported in a nitrogen purge (Hannuksella et al. [
14] and Ihantola et al. [
4]) with the flow results presented by Crompton et al.
Although the sensor used in Crompton et al.’s research was only shown to work over a short distance in these experiments and its ability for locating the source was not tested, they point out that these initial experiments indicate that this sensor may be viable for stand-off alpha detection if used with other elements in a detector system. This is due to its low background count and insensitivity to indoor lighting conditions. Also, that using a flow of gas which could be achieved through the deployment of a thin flexible pipe, which may be more easily provided in field conditions due to not requiring a gas-tight enclosure and the purging of air, could enhance radioluminescence for detection purposes. This presents a far from developed detector system, but does show a possible sensor which could be used as a foundation for the development of such.
Shaw et al. note the limitations of using PMTs to detect UVC photons, and explore the background and function of new detectors in development, Geiger-mode avalanche photodiode (GM-APD) detectors [
23]. This semi-conductor based alternative may make alpha induced air radioluminescence easier to detect than using CCD or PMT. They compared 5 different existing detection technologies, before detailing the GM-APD detector. In their tests this shows a better quantum efficiency at a wavelength of 270 nm (just inside the UVC range). Although their work does not include any testing for alpha detection, this provides an alternative detector technology which may prove useful in the detection of alpha induced radioluminescence. They also explore a number of possible applications of this technology, including the imaging of deep-UV (UVC).
The use of UVC detectors seems to somewhat overcome the issue of background interference from other light sources, however the low signal strength due to the smaller number of photons emitted in this wavelength range is an issue in terms of the distance at which these may work. Others suggest though that solar-blind detectors may not be completely ‘solar-blind’ and hence that the use of external filters to ensure that there is no interference from longer wavelengths may still be required [
23] although these would also attenuate the signal.
5.4. UVA and UVB Cameras
Other detectors trialed to date specifically focus on the main peaks in the nitrogen radioluminescence spectrum, which occur at wavelengths between 310 and 400 nm, as 95 percent of the intensity falls into this range [
3]. Although in this range the number of generated photons is greatest, the intensity of UV radiation from other sources is much higher, i.e., sunlight and traditional artificial light. Therefore, these detectors must be used in complete darkness or with artificial lighting of specific wavelengths, even when filtering or background rejecting methods are used. This limits their practical application.
Work using camera-based systems has mainly focused on locating alpha sources rather than characterising them, with an overlaid image of the radioluminescence over a conventional image being the preferred method of demonstrating the presence of an alpha emitter. This results in images where contaminated surfaces seem to ‘glow’.
Lamadie et al. used a CCD and objective lens to detect alpha sources using radioluminescence [
5]. The CCD was cooled with liquid nitrogen and was backlit, which gave it a 60 ± 5 percent quantum efficiency (QE) in the 300 to 400 nm wavelength range. This is in comparison to Sand et al. [
10] whose EMCCD achieved a maximum QE of 38 percent in the nitrogen radioluminescence wavelength range.
They noted that the luminescence was visible in what they termed a `bubble’ around the source with an approximate radius of the range of alpha particles emitted from the source, with the intensity reducing relative to the square of the distance from the source. They found these `bubbles’ limited the separation distance between sources at which the two luminescence zones could still be distinguished, which was greater than the resolution of the equipment used, and was between 30 mm and 50 mm depending on the energy of the alpha particles. They were also able to detect bulk contamination, showing that internal absorption that did not fully restrict the emission of alpha particles did not prevent detection.
They developed two equations to calculate the activity of the sample based on the signal intensity and the number of photons per alpha emission, both of which were verified by their experimental results.
The limitation of Lamadie et al.’s work is that it required long integration times of between 1 and 5 h and was carried out in complete darkness. It does however provide advancement in the quantification and characterisation of the radioluminescence phenomenon.
In 2013, Sand et al. tested an EMCCD device to carry out alpha imaging in a glove box with a quartz glass window [
32]. They were able to image two mixed fuel pellets (uranium and plutonium), with a 60 s exposure time. The experiment was most likely carried out in darkness as they cite this as being beneficial.
Sand et al. continued with this work in 2015 when they compared the efficacy of two low light cameras; an electron-multiplying CCD (EMCCD) and an intensified CCD (ICCD) [
10]. They tested both the differences between the two cameras and also the effect of detecting several sources of different activity at the same time. Their samples were of various alpha emitting materials, and activities ranged from 106 kBq to 4.3 GBq.
Both Sand et al.’s systems are sensitive to natural light (visible and UV) and therefore tests were carried out in near darkness. Testing was carried out in a modified glove box where one of the glove ports had been replaced with a quartz glass window to allow a 90 percent transmittance of photons, as compared to approximately 80 percent attenuation by standard glove box Plexiglas. Their optical results are overlaid on a conventional image.
These images show that although the higher activity sources were detected, those emitting similar radioluminescence intensities to the low background light were undetectable to both systems. They were able to achieve a resolution of better than 1 cm between sources. They also found that high intensity sources could mask lower intensity ones and suggested re-imaging after the removal of high intensity sources to check for sources of lower intensity, using longer exposure times or reduced background lighting. Sand et al. conclude that the ICCD gave marginally better results in the field than the EMCCD, partially due to its greater field of view.
Pineau et al. (patent registered) put forward a proposed stand-off alpha detection system which is broad ranging in its description, and as such all avenues of operation it describes may not necessarily have been shown to work [
35]. Their main assertion is to fill the environment containing the source with a scintillating gas, which may contain nitrogen. As nitrogen has been shown to be the main radioluminescence emitter in the UV range, this is consistent with other findings. This could be in an enclosure which is placed over the area to be investigated, which will retain the scintillation gas and has a window transparent to UV photons. However, the flow of gas used in other work [
18] could be easier to apply in the field than the need for a gas-tight enclosure to be deployed in potentially difficult to access or contaminated areas.
Pineau et al.’s detector is described as being a CCD type detector, connected to a ST 138 type controller. Due to the small number of photons produced, the system will integrate a number of images, therefore increasing the detection time. They suggest using a wavelength range of 200–400 nm. The device may also have a camera able to take a visual image over which to overlay the image of the alpha induced photons. Due to the possible interference of light in the visual spectrum, they suggest using the system in darkness or using filters to attenuate light outside of the UV spectrum. No results are presented in the effectiveness of this system, however, for a patent to be applied for it may be assumed that they were confident that this system would work and therefore that tests had been successfully carried out.
Haslip et al. use a comparison of the alpha induced nitrogen radioluminescence signals of four wavelengths; two wavelengths where nitrogen radioluminescence peaks, and two where it does not which present the background signal [
36]. A telescope is used to collect the signal, which is amplified by mirrors and focused on six UV-sensitive cameras. This is achieved through the use of beam splitters and wavelength selective filtering. Images from these 6 cameras are collated by a microprocessor proving an aggregated image to the operator which is in almost real time. Although this system is not able to reject daylight, it can be used at night where these is still a significant amount of background UV radiation, or under street lighting.
In 2008 Giakos proposed a stand-off alpha detector architecture using a spectrometer and ICCD camera, with a focusing assembly of lenses and reflectors [
28]. Their calculations indicate that two 3.7 × 10
7 Bq
239Pu sources could be detected at 25 m, even in the presence of an 18.5 × 10
7 Bq
60Co gamma source. They also suggest that the use of an active system using a Raman lidar system along with the passive radio-luminescence detector, would not only be able to determine the presence of a radiative source, but also indicate it’s biological hazard by determining the energy loss associated with the detected light though the specific spectrum. The calculations are presented in the research paper to show how the architecture was devised, but there is no evidence that this system was tested and therefore if it was successful or not, or any limiting factors found during any experimental trials.
5.5. UVA and UVB PMT Based Detector
Due to the ability to more easily quantify the signal intensity, other prototypes utilise a PMT to detect the radioluminescence. In 2010 Leybourne et al. reported their prototype detector was capable of detecting a Po-210 source (37 MBq) at 150 m distance from the detector, outdoors [
31]. Using optical filtering, telescope optics for collection, and a PMT (photo-multiplier tube), they were able to detect the presence of an alpha emitting source on the surface of any one of three, 55-gallon drums spaced 10 m apart at approximately 150 m distance. This was achieved in less than 1 min of data acquisition time for each source. Although not specifically stated it can be inferred from the text that these experiments were carried out at night as there is reference to ‘heavy traffic’ and ‘other surrounding outside illumination’ causing interference. However, even at night there is significant UV radiation outdoors.
Leybourne et al.’s filtering was able to attenuate background UV radiation and provide a sufficiently high signal-to-noise ratio to differentiate the relatively weak UV radioluminescence. They also noted an inverse squared relationship between the intensity of the UV photon signal and distance, as would be anticipated in a spherical (or hemispherical) isotropic photon emission zone around a point source.
The result of Leybourne et al.’s work is very positive in terms of indicating that it is possible to detect alpha emissions through air radioluminescence in the presence of significant UV background. However there are several drawbacks and limitations to the work. A relatively crude approach was taken for identifying the alpha source, in terms of a resolution of 10 m between sources (i.e., the distance between the drums) and the variability of the counts which show little more than the presence of a single or double source rather than anything about the nature of the source. It is possible that the experiments were carried out at night, to reduce the background UV that the device was required to reject. There is little information on the equipment specification or models used to carry out the experiment, meaning that it could not be replicated to check the accuracy of the work. This includes the bandpass of the filtering system. However, whilst limited this work does show that there are approaches to this method of alpha particle detection which may prove viable in the field.
Baschenko used a monochromator and PMT in photon counting mode to determine the spectrum, and low light sensitive film to image the source [
3]. They found that the ratio of intensities between alpha, beta and gamma induced radioluminescence were 1:10
−8:10
−10 respectively, allowing the much greater intensity of alpha radioluminescence to be detected in the presence of other radiation sources. This has two implications. The first being that this technique can be used to combat exposing personnel to beta and gamma radiation, which may also be present within the range of traditional alpha particle detectors. The second is that the different types of radiation do not interfere with the alpha detection, making it suitable for mixed radiation environments normally seen within the nuclear industry.
Whilst characterising the alpha induced radioluminescence, Baschenko found that 95 percent of this was in the 310 nm to 400 nm wavelength range and was due to the 2
+ nitrogen transition system. They calculated that there were approximately 30 UV photons emitted per alpha event, with 2.5 × 10
−5 of alpha particle energy being transformed to photon energy. They also assert that alpha particles may be emitted in a cone shape with an angular distribution which is proportional to
, where
θ is the angle between normal to the surface and the flight of the alpha particle. Although this conclusion is not supported by other literature which finds the emission of photons is isotropic [
19] and therefore is likely to be a misinterpretation or anomaly in the results.
Baschenko used these results to calculate a possible detector set up. From calculations of the effectiveness of this system, they were able to determine that this would not be suitable for use out of doors as background UV would always exceed the required level, even at night.
Other work of Sand et al. focuses on two potential methods of detecting radioluminescence; spectral and coincidence filtering. In 2010 Sand et al. and Hannuksela et al. tested both these methods [
11,
14]. They compared background lighting to the radioluminescence signal using a beam splitter and interference filters in a device they named Handheld Alpha UV Application (HAUVA).
Noting that cameras require relatively long integration times, Sand et al. and Hannuksela et al.’s spectral filtering detection system uses two PMTs, which allows detection using an integration time of approximately 1 s for a 100 kBq source at 400 mm distance from the detector. This was achieved under artificial background lighting conditions which did not produce UV. Using a 40 nm bandpass filter, the signal was first filtered into the peak air radioluminescence wavelength range, 300–340 nm (where 337 nm is the most intense peak of the spectrum). The signal was then split, with the background portion being passed through a further 15 nm bandpass filter giving a 299 to 303 nm wavelength range.
Using two PMTs and a time correlated single photon counting unit Sand et al. and Hannuksela at al. verified that all photons from a single alpha decay were emitted in one 5 ns time window, as found in earlier work. This time period was sufficiently short to make a background count event at the same time as an alpha induced photon improbable. Using coincidence filtering, they were able to detect radioluminescence against background light which was 500 times more intense than the radioluminescence. At this stage in their work, they quote a value of 400 photons per 5 MeV alpha emission. However this is reduced in later work to 20 photons per MeV of alpha energy, more in line with others’ findings.
Sand et al. and Hannuksela et al.’s optimised optics, designed with a large collection angle to collect the greatest number of emitted photons, have a collection efficiency of 0.12 percent at 400 mm, and they noted how this dropped off rapidly from 300 mm onwards, showing the importance of distance to source. They also found a rapid drop in signal intensity when the source was moved 20 mm to the side, giving a positive indication for source location possibilities.
By using a nitrogen-only atmosphere and a 10 kBq 241Am source, Sand et al. and Hannuksela et al. found that the detector counts per second increased to 650 cps, from 150 cps in normal atmosphere. They attributed this increase to the removal of the quenching effect of oxygen.
Building on their earlier work, in 2016 Sand et al. published the results of alpha induced radioluminescence detection experiments carried out in bright lighting conditions [
16]. Using the same set up with two different equipment options, they were able to distinguish a 4 kBq source at 1 m in 10 s under UV free lighting, and 800 kBq under bright fluorescent lighting.
The general set up for Sand et al.’s experiments comprised of a telescope, utilising two lenses to focus photons onto the eyepiece. This light passes through a filter stack before being focused onto the window of a PMT. The PMT is used in photon counting mode to determine the intensity of this signal. Two different filter stacks and PMTs are used. The first is a PMT with an ultra-bialkali photocathode which is sensitive in the near UV range. The associated filter stack is sensitive at a central wavelength of 335 nm. This was tested under yellow lighting conditions. The other set up utilises a solar blind PMT which has a caesium-telluride photocathode, with a filter stack centred at 260 nm, which was tested under fluorescent lighting conditions.
Sand et al. recognize the limitations of their systems, in that they are not suited to imaging due to utilising telescope optics, and that scans are time consuming due to the narrow field of view. Due to the differing field environments, each site would have to be surveyed in advance to determine if these detector systems were suitable for that particular site. They also note that solar blind camera detection methods can only be used in open spaces, however, the reasoning behind this statement is not qualified.
Kume et al. build on the work of Lamadie et al. [
5] and Chichester and Watson [
12], whom they consider to have both developed ‘convenient’ systems for stand-off alpha detection, by addressing the issue of noise generated by a high gamma radiation background which create a low signal to noise ratio [
34]. They note that Ihantola et al. have gone some distance in noise rejection by using time-coincidence, but that this has not completely removed the background noise generated by gamma-rays [
4]. Their solution is an ‘alpha camera’ which utilises a lens and mirror to focus the UV photons onto the UV detector, a PMT with a response in the range of 300–650 nm, peaking at 350 nm (35 percent QE). Lead shielding around the PMT and mirror reduces the influence of gamma-rays on the system. A CCD camera, also within the confines of the lead shield, provides a visual image over which the results of the PMT can be overlaid to provide a visualisation of the alpha contamination’s location.
One limitation of Kume et al.’s work is that this detector currently works exclusively in dark conditions. Their proposed resolution to this issue for field operations is to use a coating on the lens of their system to filter visual light. There is no discussion on the difficulties that this may present due to the attenuation of the UV light that is likely to occur, or to the wavelength range of the light attenuated by the filter, or what the nature of this coating will be. In practice this may be a more significant issue than they suggest.
Inrig et al. used a position sensitive PMT with UV filters and a series of 6 lenses to detect a 1 µCi (37 kBq) source from 1.5 m distance with a 10 s integration time [
8]. This was accomplished in a windowless room with dim lighting by using an algorithm and the known frequency of oscillation of the electricity supply to the lighting in their experimental environment to reject any unwanted light. They were able to image the alpha sources, although the resolution of the images was poor. This method may be suited to internal environments without windows where the frequency of electronic supply oscillation is known. However, it is possibly not well suited for general field operations.
In 2012 Ihantola et al. used coincident spectrometry of gamma radiation and alpha-induced radioluminescence to enhance alpha detection in areas of high activity [
33]. Radioluminescence photons from an alpha emission trigger the operation of a gamma detector. Hence only gamma photons which occur in the presence of alpha induced photons are detected. This ensures that the detector is focused on the alpha emitter and not other gamma emitting sources which may produce photons of a higher energy than the alpha emitter and so mask the alpha source. This was undertaken not only to locate the source, but also to characterise the source and determine the isotope, which cannot as yet be achieved with alpha radioluminescence alone. The alpha detector, comprised of a collection lens and PMT, was able to identity a 4.2 kBq source from 157 mm away in both a nitrogen or air atmosphere. In nitrogen the intensity of the signal was 150 times the background, in air 30 times. The 50 mm field of view provided by their test equipment means that a very localised analysis can take place of the alpha emitter. It is also possible to detect sources in sealed containers if the material of these is transparent to UV radiation, where UV photons will escape, but alpha particles will be stopped by the container.
Their experiments were carried out in the dark, and Ihantola et al. suggest the use of filters for daylight working. Although the system worked, they conclude that the UV system was better for locating the source and the gamma detector for identifying the isotope, and suggest the two could be separated for better efficiency. In 2013 this work was continued using dim red LED lighting which allowed a level of illumination sufficient for working and for imaging of the set up [
4]. They note during this work that the coincidence filtering method works better with a high gamma background and integration times of minutes or hours. This method allows an avenue for the identification of the isotope as the gamma emissions are more suited to this type of analysis than alpha induced radioluminescence.
There are limitations to this work of Ihantola et al. Detection of the alpha-induced radioluminescence photon suffers from the same issues as with other detectors, primarily the interference of environmental light sources. However, Ihantola et al. found that this coincidence spectrometry technique is ten times faster than a conventional gamma spectrometer, and from this it seems that their assertion that it is a step forward is not unsubstantiated.
All of the above research results confirm that it is possible to detect alpha induced radioluminescence in a number of ways and situations, but as these require a background of no, low or special light they are unsuitable to be used in the field at present due to the difficulties in controlling the lighting conditions.
5.6. Other Detector Types
Although in the main recent detectors have focused on the detection of nitrogen radioluminescence photons, this is not the only possible secondary effect of alpha particle emissions which could prove suitable for the detection of alpha contamination.
Sprangle et al. put forward an alternative method of stand-off radiation detection through the use of an ionising laser and a probe beam [
37]. Although their work is specifically for gamma detection, they plan to test their concept using an alpha source to reduce the safety issues. Hence this method may be suitable for alpha detection. Ionising radiation produces free electrons in air. These attach themselves to oxygen molecules and form O
2 ions in greater concentration to free electrons. A high powered laser, focused close to the radiation source is used to photo-detach the negative ions, which initiates an avalanche ionisation process. A probe beam can then be used to detect the changes in electron density caused by the avalanche ionisation, and the presence of radioactivity determined using measurement of the frequency modulation. The main advantage of this system is that it would be able to detect ionising gamma radiation from distances greater than 100 m.
Sprangle et al.’s paper highlights a potential design concept for a gamma detector, which has two drawbacks when applied to alpha detection. This is a design concept which has not as yet been proven for gamma detection for which it was designed. In addition, an examination of the possible feasibility of using this design for alpha detection is not presented in this paper. For example the much shorter mean free path in air of alpha radiation in comparison to gamma radiation is likely to produce a smaller ionisation ‘bubble’ which may present challenges in focusing the laser sufficiently close to the alpha source without prior knowledge of its whereabouts. It may also find the materials used for shielded windows challenging, for example in glove boxes or hot cells. However, this does present a possible alternative method of alpha detection possibly at further distances, which may merit further consideration.
In order to address the propagation loss at a distance from the source to the detector, Yao et al. used a collimated beam emission from a nitrogen laser at a wavelength of 337 nm to further excite alpha ionised air molecules from the
to
state [
38]. The absorption of the energy required was detected and from this the presence of alpha radiation was identified. This detector was successful in detecting a 1.48 GBq source at a maximum standoff distance of 10 m. They found that the detection signal was not sensitive to the distance between the detector and source, as it is with the photon detector methods. In their tests they were able to determine the relative intensities between two sources of different activities. They also note that due to the longer carrier lifetime in the
band compared to the
band, the population of carriers in the
may be an indication of the intensity of the radiation causing the excitation.
Although the work of Yao et al. was successful in identifying the presence of an alpha source its main drawback is the required detector configuration. It requires an emitter and detector diametrically opposite each other in line with the alpha source. This means that both sides of the alpha source need to be accessible, which may not be possible for surface contamination, or in other hard to access areas. It would make scanning difficult to conduct, as the detector alignment would need to be parallel to any source, rather than perpendicular (see
Figure 10). As the distance from the source to the laser or detector has no effect on the signal it would not be possible to determine the position of the source between the two, and direction to the source would be difficult to determine. Hence, it would be difficult and time consuming to find the source of the alpha emissions.
Baschenko suggests a similar alternative method, using a laser of specific wavelength which would affect air molecules already excited to a certain energy state due to alpha ionisation [
3]. This is the same as they approach of Yao et al. [
38], but Baschenko aims to detect the change in the number of photons that are emitted due to the increase in energy created by the addition of the laser energy to the already excited nitrogen molecules, rather than changes to the laser probe signal. Baschenko has not tested his approach and merely mentions that this may be theoretically possible, whilst noting that there would be significant technical difficulties in using this approach.
Allander et al. developed a system for detecting the ion pairs produced by alpha particle ionisation of the surrounding air, which they call the LRAD system (Long-Range Alpha Detector) [
39]. It utilises an air current or an electric field to transport the ion pairs to a collection grid where they are detected as an electric current, the current being proportional to the activity and therefore allowing a measurement of this. However, these require either that the potentially contaminated object is placed inside a chamber where filtered air can be flowed over it to carry the ion pairs to the grid, or for the detector system to be introduced into an existing pipe where an air flow can be used to measure any contamination inside the pipe. Both of these have implications for the ease of use in the field, and the initial setting up of the system, including moving and cutting into potentially contaminated materials. A third method allows for the detector to be placed over a potentially contaminated surface (for example soil or a concrete floor) and an electronic field be used to detect the ion pairs. The main drawback of this system is that the detector could come into contact with contamination, thus becoming contaminated itself, and still requires the operator to be in close proximity to the contamination to set up the device. However, in processing samples, especially in large quantities, and for internal pipe examination, these methods could prove superior to traditional techniques. Certainly radioluminescence would be harder to detect within a pipe without special deployment equipment.